Rashi on Parshas Tetzaveh – Commentary

Introduction to Rashi on Parshas Tetzaveh

Rashi’s commentary on Parshas Tetzaveh focuses on the structure of the priesthood and the precision of the Mishkan service. He explains the garments of the Kohanim, the process of their consecration, and the daily offerings that sustain the Divine presence among Israel. Drawing from Midrash and the Talmud, Rashi reveals how each detail — from the stones of the breastplate to the measure of oil in the lamps — carries halachic meaning and spiritual purpose. Through his explanations, the priestly service emerges as a carefully ordered system of sanctification, atonement, and constant devotion before Hashem. 

Chapter 27:20-21

27:20 — “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זָךְ כָּתִית לַמָּאוֹר לְהַעֲלֹת נֵר תָּמִיד”
“And you shall command the children of Israel that they shall take for you pure olive oil, beaten for the light, to cause the lamp to burn continually.”

Rashi explains the phrase “שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זָךְ” — pure olive oil.
The word זך (clear/pure) means oil without any sediment or lees. This purity was not achieved by straining the oil after extraction. Rather, as taught in Menachos (פו ע״א), the olives were allowed to ripen at the top of the tree, producing the clearest oil.

On the word “כָּתִית” — beaten — Rashi explains the specific method of extraction.
The olives were pounded in a mortar and not ground in a mill. This method ensured that the oil would be free of sediment. After the first drop of oil was extracted through pounding, the olives could then be taken to the mill and ground.

Rashi clarifies the halachic distinction:

• The first oil, extracted by pounding, was valid for the Menorah.
• The second oil, obtained by grinding, was invalid for the Menorah.
• However, that second oil was valid for use in the מנחות (meal-offerings).

This is derived from the phrase “כָּתִית לַמָּאוֹר” — beaten for the light.
The requirement of being “beaten” applies specifically to the light of the Menorah, but not to the meal-offerings (Menachos פו ע״א; see also Rashi to שמות כ״ט:מ).

On the phrase “לְהַעֲלֹת נֵר תָּמִיד” — to cause the lamp to burn continually —
Rashi explains that the Kohen must light the lamp until the flame rises on its own. The wording “להעלות” implies that the flame must ascend independently. This teaching is based on Shabbos (כא ע״א).

On the word “תָּמִיד” — continually —
Rashi clarifies that “continual” does not always mean uninterrupted. Rather, it can mean a regularly recurring act.

He gives several examples:

• The עֹלַת תָּמִיד (continual burnt-offering) was offered daily, not constantly.
• The מנחת חביתין is called תמיד, yet it was brought half in the morning and half in the evening.
• However, the תמיד used regarding the לחם הפנים (showbread) means uninterrupted continuity from one Shabbos to the next (שמות כ״ה:ל).

Thus, in this context, “תמיד” refers to the regular nightly lighting.

27:21 — “בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד מִחוּץ לַפָּרֹכֶת אֲשֶׁר עַל־הָעֵדֻת יַעֲרֹךְ אֹתוֹ אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו מֵעֶרֶב עַד־בֹּקֶר לִפְנֵי ה׳ חֻקַּת עוֹלָם לְדֹרֹתָם מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל”
“In the Tent of Meeting, outside the curtain that is before the testimony, Aharon and his sons shall arrange it from evening to morning before Hashem; it is an eternal statute for their generations from the children of Israel.”

On the phrase “מֵעֶרֶב עַד בֹּקֶר” — from evening until morning —
Rashi explains that the lamp must be given its proper measure of oil so it will burn the entire night.

Chazal calculated this measure as:

• Half a log of oil per lamp
• This amount was sufficient even for the long nights of Teves

They therefore established this same measure for every night of the year.
If oil remained over during the shorter nights, this was not a problem (Menachos פט ע״א).

Closing Summary

In these opening pesukim, Rashi emphasizes the precision of the Menorah service: the purity of the oil, the method of its extraction, the correct lighting technique, and the halachic meaning of “תמיד.” Through citations from Menachos and Shabbos, he shows that the Torah’s brief words encode detailed halachic practice, revealing a service defined by exact measures, disciplined method, and consistent daily devotion.

Chapter 28

28:1 — “וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ אֶת־אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ וְאֶת־בָּנָיו אִתּוֹ מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְכַהֲנוֹ־לִי”
“And you shall bring near to yourself Aharon your brother and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, to serve Me as priests.”

Rashi explains the phrase “וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ” — and you shall bring near to yourself.
This instruction comes after the completion of the work of the Mishkan. Only once the construction of the Mishkan is finished are Aharon and his sons brought forward to be installed into the priesthood.

28:3 — “וְאַתָּה תְּדַבֵּר אֶל־כָּל־חַכְמֵי־לֵב… וְעָשׂוּ אֶת־בִּגְדֵי אַהֲרֹן לְקַדְּשׁוֹ לְכַהֲנוֹ־לִי”
“And you shall speak to all the wise of heart… and they shall make the garments of Aharon to sanctify him, to serve Me as priest.”

On the phrase “לְקַדְּשׁוֹ לְכַהֲנוֹ לִי” — to sanctify him, to serve Me as priest —
Rashi explains that the garments themselves effect the sanctification. They install him into the priesthood so that he becomes a Kohen for Hashem.

The term כהונה, priesthood, means service.
Rashi notes that the word denotes servitude or service, citing the old French term that reflects this meaning.

28:4 — “וְאֵלֶּה הַבְּגָדִים אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשׂוּ חֹשֶׁן וְאֵפוֹד…”
“And these are the garments that they shall make: a breastplate and an ephod…”

Rashi explains each of the listed garments:

חשן — the breastplate
It is an ornament worn opposite the heart.

אפוד — the ephod
Rashi states that he has not received a tradition nor found a clear description of its shape in the baraisa. Therefore, he offers a reasoned reconstruction.

He suggests:

• It was tied behind the Kohen.
• Its width matched the width of a man’s back.
• It resembled an apron, similar to the riding-aprons worn by noblewomen on horseback.

He proves that the ephod was something girded around the body from the verse:

שמואל ב ו:י״ד — “וְדָוִד חָגוּר אֵפוֹד בָּד”
“And David was girded with a linen ephod.”

This shows the ephod was a garment tied around the body.

However, Rashi explains that it cannot be only a girdle, because:

ויקרא ח:ז — “וַיִּתֵּן עָלָיו אֶת הָאֵפֹד… וַיַּחְגֹּר אֹתוֹ בְּחֵשֶׁב הָאֵפֹד”
“He put the ephod upon him… and girded him with the belt of the ephod.”

From Onkelos’ translation, it is clear that:

• The חשב is the girdle.
• The אפוד is the ornamental garment itself.

Nor can the ephod refer only to the shoulder-straps, since the Torah says:

“שְׁתֵּי כִתְפוֹת הָאֵפוֹד”
“The two shoulder-pieces of the ephod.”

This shows:

• The ephod is one component.
• The shoulder-pieces are another.
• The girdle is another.

Therefore, Rashi concludes:

• The name אפוד refers to the apron-like garment hanging below.
• The חשב is the girdle above it.
• The shoulder-pieces are attached to it.

He further supports this from Yonasan ben Uziel’s translation:

• “אֵפוֹד” is translated as כרדוט — a garment.
• The same word is used for the robes worn by the king’s daughters (שמואל ב י״ג:י״ח).

מעיל — the robe
This was like a shirt, similar to the כתונת, but:

• The כתונת was worn directly on the body.
• The מעיל was the outer garment.

תשבץ — quilted or patterned garment
This refers to decorative settings.

• These were indentations made in gold ornaments.
• They served as settings for precious stones and pearls.
• Similar settings are mentioned regarding the ephod stones:
  “מֻסַבֹּת מִשְׁבְּצוֹת זָהָב”.

מצנפת — the turban
A kind of domed helmet-like covering.

• Elsewhere the Torah calls them מגבעות.
• The Targum translates this as כובעין — helmets.

אבנט — the belt
This was the girdle worn over the כתונת.

Rashi explains the order of garments from:

ויקרא ח:ז

• First: כתונת (inner garment)
• Then: אבנט (belt)
• Then: מעיל (robe)
• Then: אפוד (ephod)

Thus:

• The אבנט girded the inner garment.
• The ephod girded the outer garment.

בגדי קדש — holy garments
Rashi explains that these garments were made from the תרומה that was sanctified for Hashem’s Name (ספרא, אחרי מות א:י).

28:5 — “וְהֵם יִקְחוּ אֶת־הַזָּהָב וְאֶת־הַתְּכֵלֶת…”
“And they shall take the gold and the blue…”

Rashi explains:

The “they” refers to the wise-hearted craftsmen mentioned earlier.
These craftsmen would receive the gold and blue wool from the donors in order to make the garments.

28:6 — “וְעָשׂוּ אֶת־הָאֵפוֹד…”
“And they shall make the ephod…”

Rashi explains his method of description:

If he were to explain the ephod and breastplate in the exact order of the verses, the explanation would become fragmented, and the reader might misunderstand how the parts fit together. Therefore, he first describes the entire construction clearly, and only afterward will explain it in the order of the pesukim.

Rashi then describes the structure of the ephod in detail:

• It resembled an apron worn by women riding on horseback.
• It was tied behind the Kohen, opposite his heart, below his elbows.
• Its width matched the width of a man’s back and extended somewhat more.
• It reached down to his heels.

The girdle (חשב):

• Was attached to the top edge across the width.
• Was woven together with the ephod.
• Extended on both sides to wrap around the body.

The shoulder-pieces:

• Were attached to the girdle.
• One on the right, one on the left.
• Located behind the Kohen at the ends of the apron.
• When lifted, they rested on his shoulders.
• They were like two straps made of the same material.

Onyx stones:

• One set in the right shoulder-piece.
• One set in the left.

The breastplate connection:

• Gold chains were inserted into rings on the top corners of the breastplate.
• These chains were fixed into the settings on the shoulder-pieces.
• Thus, the breastplate hung over the Kohen’s heart.

Lower connections:

• Two rings were placed at the lower corners of the breastplate.
• Two corresponding rings were placed on the ephod below.
• A thread of blue wool fastened them together.
• This kept the breastplate firmly attached to the ephod and prevented it from swinging loose.

Materials of the ephod:

“זָהָב תְּכֵלֶת וְאַרְגָּמָן תּוֹלַעַת שָׁנִי וְשֵׁשׁ מָשְׁזָר”

Rashi explains the weaving process:

• Gold was beaten into thin plates.
• Threads were cut from these plates.
• Each gold thread was woven with six threads of another material:
  
  • Six of תכלת with gold
  • Six of ארגמן with gold
  • Six of תולעת שני with gold
  • Six of linen with gold

Then all were twisted together into one thread.
This resulted in a thread that was twenty-eight strands thick.

This is taught in יומא ע״ב ע״א and derived from:

שמות ל״ט:ג
“וַיְרַקְּעוּ אֶת־פַּחֵי הַזָּהָב… לַעֲשׂוֹת אֶת פְּתִילֵי הַזָּהָב…”

מעשה חשב — work of an artist
Rashi explains that this refers to a special form of weaving:

• The cloth was woven on both sides.
• The designs on each side were different from one another.

28:7 — “שְׁתֵּי כְתֵפֹת חֹבְרֹת יִהְיֶה־לּוֹ אֶל־שְׁנֵי קְצוֹתָיו וְחֻבָּר”
“It shall have two shoulder-pieces joined to its two ends, and it shall be joined together.”

Rashi explains the structure of the shoulder-pieces in relation to the ephod.

• The apron-like portion of the ephod hung below.
• The חשב האפוד (girdle) was attached above it, similar to the riding-aprons worn by noblewomen.
• From the back of the Kohen, two wide strap-like pieces were attached to the girdle.
• One strap corresponded to each shoulder.

These straps were:

• Lifted over the shoulders.
• Folded forward across the chest.
• Connected to the rings of the breastplate.
• Held firmly against the heart so they would not slip backward.

Each strap had an onyx stone fixed into it, one on each shoulder.

On the phrase “אֶל־שְׁנֵי קְצוֹתָיו” — to its two ends —
Rashi explains that this refers to the width of the ephod.

• Its width matched only the width of the priest’s back.
• It did not encircle the entire body.
• Its height reached up to the elbows.

This is derived from:

יחזקאל מ״ד:י״ח — “לֹא יַחְגְּרוּ בַּיָּזַע”
“They shall not gird themselves in a place of sweat.”

From this, Chazal teach:

• The belt was not worn above the elbows.
• Nor below the waist.
• Rather, it was worn at the level of the elbows (זבחים י״ח ב).

On the word “וְחֻבָּר” — and it shall be joined —
Rashi explains:

• The ephod was joined to the shoulder-pieces below the girdle.
• This joining was done with a needle.
• They were not woven together as one piece.
• Each was woven separately and then attached.

28:8 — “וְחֵשֶׁב אֲפֻדָּתוֹ אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו…”
“And the girdle of its ephod which is upon it…”

Rashi explains:

וחשב אפדתו
This refers to the girdle by which the ephod was fastened, adjusted, and used to adorn the Kohen.

אשר עליו
This girdle was located on the upper edge of the apron-like ephod.

כמעשהו
The girdle was made in the same manner as the ephod itself:

• Woven as “מעשה חושב” — artistic work.
• Made from the same five materials.

ממנו יהיה
The girdle was woven together with the ephod as one piece.

• It was not to be woven separately.
• It was not attached afterward.

28:10 — “כְּתֹלְדֹתָם”
“According to their birth.”

Rashi explains that the names of the tribes engraved on the onyx stones were arranged in birth order.

On one stone:

• Reuven
• Shimon
• Levi
• Yehudah
• Dan
• Naftali

On the second stone:

• Gad
• Asher
• Yissachar
• Zevulun
• Yosef
• Binyamin

The name Binyamin was written in its full spelling, as it appears at his birth:

בראשית ל״ה:י״ח

This arrangement produced twenty-five letters on each stone (סוטה ל״ו א).

28:11 — “מַעֲשֵׂה חָרַשׁ אֶבֶן…”
“The work of an artificer in stone…”

Rashi explains the grammatical form of the phrase.

The word “חָרַשׁ” is in construct with the word that follows it, meaning:

• An artisan of stone.

He brings parallels:

ישעיהו מ״ד:י״ג — “חָרַשׁ עֵצִים”
A worker in wood.

ישעיהו מ״ד:י״ב — “חָרַשׁ בַּרְזֶל”
A worker in iron.

In all these cases, the word is in construct form and therefore has the vowel pattern reflecting that connection.

On the phrase “פִּתּוּחֵי חֹתָם” — engravings of a signet —
Rashi explains:

• The letters were incised into the stones.
• Like the engraving of a signet ring used to seal letters.
• The writing was clear and distinct.

On “עַל שְׁמֹת”
This simply means the same as “בִּשְׁמוֹת” — with the names.

On “מֻסַבֹּת מִשְׁבְּצוֹת” — surrounded with settings —
Rashi explains:

• Each stone was set into a gold indentation.
• The gold was shaped like a hollow to match the stone.
• The stone was sunk into the setting.
• The setting surrounded it completely.

These settings were then attached to the shoulder-pieces of the ephod.

28:12 — “לְזִכָּרֹן”
“For a memorial.”

Rashi explains:

The purpose of the stones was that the Holy One, blessed be He, would see the names of the tribes written before Him and remember their righteousness (שמות רבה ל״ח:ח).

28:13 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ מִשְׁבְּצֹת זָהָב”
“And you shall make settings of gold.”

Rashi explains:

The plural form implies a minimum of two settings.

He also notes:

• In this section, only part of their function is explained.
• The full explanation appears later in the section of the breastplate.

28:14 — “וּשְׁתֵּי שַׁרְשְׁרֹת זָהָב…”
“And two chains of gold…”

Rashi explains:

שרשרת
This word means chains, similar to שלשלאות.
The letters ר and ל may interchange, as seen in certain Aramaic usages.

מגבלות
This means at the edge or border of the breastplate.

מעשה עבות
This refers to chains made of plaited threads.

• Not chains made of rings or hooks.
• Rather, chains made like those used for censers.

On the phrase “וְנָתַתָּ אֶת הַשַּׁרְשְׁרֹת” — and you shall place the chains —
Rashi explains:

• This is not the place where the command to make or attach the chains is given.
• The verbs here are not commands, but future descriptions.
• The actual command appears later in the section of the breastplate.

This verse only explains part of the function of the settings:

• The settings were made now.
• Later, when the chains were made for the breastplate, they would be attached to these settings.

28:15 — “חֹשֶׁן מִשְׁפָּט”
“The breastplate of judgment.”

Rashi gives two explanations:

First explanation:

• It atoned for errors in judgment (זבחים פ״ח ב; ירושלמי יומא ז:ה).

Second explanation:

• The term “משפט” refers to clarification and certainty.
• The breastplate, through the Urim and Tumim, made its answers clear and definite.

Rashi explains that the word משפט has three meanings:

• The claims of litigants.
• The final verdict.
• The punishment that follows:
  
  • Death
  • Flogging
  • Monetary payment

Here, it refers to clarification of matters.

On “כְּמַעֲשֵׂה אֵפוֹד”
The breastplate was made:

• As artistic woven work.
• From the same five materials as the ephod.

28:16 — “זֶרֶת אָרְכּוֹ וְזֶרֶת רָחְבּוֹ”
“A span in length and a span in width.”

Rashi explains:

• The breastplate was doubled.
• It hung in front over the Kohen’s heart, as the verse says:
  “וְהָיוּ עַל לֵב אַהֲרֹן” (28:30).

It was:

• Suspended from the shoulder-pieces of the ephod.
• These came from behind the Kohen over his shoulders.
• They hung slightly forward.
• The breastplate was attached to them by chains and rings.

28:17 — “וּמִלֵּאתָ בוֹ מִלֻּאַת אֶבֶן”
“And you shall fill it with settings of stones.”

Rashi explains:

The term “מִלֻּאַת” (fillings) is used because:

• The stones filled the hollow indentations.
• These indentations were specially made for them in the settings.
• Since they filled these spaces, they are called “fillings.”

28:20 — “וְהַטּוּרִים בְּמִלּוּאֹתָם מְשֻׁבָּצִים זָהָב יִהְיוּ”
“And the rows shall be set in gold in their settings.”

Rashi explains the phrase “בְּמִלּוּאֹתָם” — in their fillings.

• Each row of stones was surrounded by gold settings.
• The depth of each setting was made precisely to match the thickness of the stone.
• The stone filled the setting exactly — no less and no more.

Thus, “בְּמִלּוּאֹתָם” means that the depth of the gold indentation corresponded exactly to the stone’s thickness.

28:21 — “אִישׁ עַל שְׁמוֹ”
“Each man with his name.”

Rashi explains that the stones were arranged according to the order of the tribes’ births.

• The sequence of stones followed the sequence of the sons’ births.
• For example:
  
  • אֹדֶם for Reuven
  • פִּטְדָה for Shimon
• And so for all the tribes.

28:22 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ עַל הַחֹשֶׁן שַׁרְשְׁרֹת גַּבְלֻת מַעֲשֵׂה עֲבֹת זָהָב טָהוֹר”
“And you shall make for the breastplate chains of boundary, of plaited work, of pure gold.”

On the phrase “עַל הַחֹשֶׁן” —
Rashi explains that it means “for the breastplate,” not “upon it.”

• The purpose of the chains was to fasten them into the rings of the breastplate, as explained later.

On the word “שַׁרְשְׁרֹת” —
Rashi explains that this term is related to the word שֹׁרֶשׁ (root).

• Just as roots hold a tree firmly in the ground,
• These chains held the breastplate firmly, suspending it from the ephod.

Rashi notes that these chains are the same two chains mentioned earlier with the settings.

He addresses Menachem ben Saruk’s explanation, who suggested that the extra ר in שַׁרְשֶׁרֶת is superfluous, similar to forms like שִׁלְשֹׁם and רֵיקָם.
Rashi rejects this and maintains that:

• שַׁרְשֶׁרֶת in Biblical Hebrew corresponds to
• שַׁלְשֶׁלֶת in Mishnaic Hebrew (משנה כלים י״ד:ג).

On “גַּבְלֻת” —
This is the same as מִגְבָּלוֹת mentioned earlier.

• It means the chains were fixed into rings placed on the border (קצה) of the breastplate.
• Every use of the word גבול here means an edge or end.

On “מַעֲשֵׂה עֲבֹת” —
This refers to plaited work.

28:23 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ עַל הַחֹשֶׁן שְׁתֵּי טַבְּעוֹת זָהָב”
“And you shall make for the breastplate two rings of gold.”

Rashi again explains that “עַל הַחֹשֶׁן” means “for the breastplate.”

• The rings were made to be fixed onto it, not formed as part of it.
• Proof: the verse later says “וְנָתַתָּ” — and you shall place them.
• If they had been made directly on it, this second instruction would be unnecessary.

The same interpretive rule applies to the chains.

On “עַל שְׁנֵי קְצוֹת הַחֹשֶׁן” —
These are the two upper corners of the breastplate near the neck:

• One on the right
• One on the left
• Positioned opposite the shoulder-pieces of the ephod

28:24 — “וְנָתַתָּ אֶת שְׁתֵּי עֲבֹתוֹת הַזָּהָב”
“And you shall place the two plaited chains of gold.”

Rashi explains:

• These are the same chains previously mentioned.
• Earlier, the Torah did not specify where they were attached.
• Here, it clarifies that they are inserted into the rings of the breastplate.

He adds a proof:

• In Parshas Pekudei, these chains are not mentioned twice.
• This shows they are the same chains, not additional ones.

28:25 — “וְאֵת שְׁתֵּי קְצוֹת שְׁתֵּי הָעֲבֹתוֹת”
“And the two ends of the two plaited chains.”

Rashi clarifies that this refers to:

• The two ends of each chain.

On “תִּתֵּן עַל שְׁתֵּי הַמִּשְׁבְּצוֹת” —
These are the same settings mentioned earlier.

• Previously, their function and placement were not explained.
• Here, it clarifies that the ends of the chains are inserted into them.

The arrangement:

• The two ends of the right chain are fixed into the right setting.
• The two ends of the left chain are fixed into the left setting.

These settings are then placed on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod.

On “עַל כִּתְפוֹת הָאֵפוֹד” —
The settings were placed:

• One on each shoulder-piece.

Thus:

• The shoulder-pieces support the breastplate so it does not fall.
• However, this alone would still allow the bottom of the breastplate to swing and strike the Kohen’s body.

Therefore, additional rings were needed below.

On “אֶל מוּל פָּנָיו” —
This means the outer-facing side of the ephod.

• The settings were not placed on the side facing the robe.
• Only on the visible, outward-facing side.

28:26 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ שְׁתֵּי טַבְּעוֹת זָהָב”
“And you shall make two rings of gold.”

Rashi explains that these rings were placed on:

• The two lower corners of the breastplate.

On “עַל שְׂפָתוֹ אֲשֶׁר אֶל עֵבֶר הָאֵפוֹד בָּיְתָה” —
Rashi gives two identifying markers for their placement:

• They were on the lower edge, since that edge lay opposite the ephod.
• They were placed on the inner-facing side of the breastplate, toward the ephod, not outward.

This is because:

• The ephod was girded at the waist.
• The apron folded forward across the body.
• The lower corners of the breastplate rested against it.

28:27 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ שְׁתֵּי טַבְּעוֹת זָהָב וְנָתַתָּ אֹתָם עַל שְׁתֵּי כִּתְפוֹת הָאֵפוֹד מִלְּמַטָּה”
“And you shall make two rings of gold and place them on the two shoulder-pieces of the ephod below.”

Rashi explains:

• The settings were placed at the top of the shoulder-pieces.
• These rings, however, were placed at their lower ends — where they were attached to the ephod.

This is the meaning of:

• “לְעֻמַּת מַחְבַּרְתּוֹ” — near the point of attachment.
• Slightly above the girdle.

A thread of blue wool was inserted:

• Through these rings
• And through the lower rings of the breastplate

This fastening:

• Prevented the bottom of the breastplate from swinging forward and backward.
• Ensured it lay properly against the robe.

On “מִמּוּל פָּנָיו” —
This again means the outer-facing side.

28:28 — “וְיִרְכְּסוּ אֶת הַחֹשֶׁן”
“And they shall fasten the breastplate.”

Rashi explains “וירכסו” as an expression of joining or binding.

He brings examples:

• “מֵרֻכְסֵי אִישׁ” (תהילים ל״א) — joined bands of men
• “וְהָרְכָסִים לְבִקְעָה” (ישעיהו מ׳) — mountains closely joined

On “לִהְיוֹת עַל חֵשֶׁב הָאֵפוֹד” —
This means:

• The breastplate should be firmly attached to the girdle of the ephod.

On “וְלֹא יִזַּח” —
Rashi explains that this means it should not loosen or detach.

• The term יִזַּח denotes separation or breaking away.
• Rashi notes that this word is of Arabic origin, as explained by Dunash ben Labrat.

28:30 — “וְנָתַתָּ אֶל חֹשֶׁן הַמִּשְׁפָּט אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים”
“And you shall place into the breastplate of judgment the Urim and the Thummim.”

Rashi explains that the Urim and Thummim were:

• An inscription of the Divine Name.
• Placed within the folds of the breastplate.

Through this inscription:

• The breastplate illuminated its words (אורים — from אור, light).
• It made its statements complete and true (תמים — from תמם, completeness).

Rashi notes that in the Second Temple:

• The breastplate itself existed.
• The Kohen Gadol could not serve without it.
• However, the Divine Name that constituted the Urim and Thummim was no longer present.

The breastplate was called “משפט” (judgment) because:

• Through the Urim and Thummim, decisions were rendered.
• As it says: “וְשָׁאַל לוֹ בְּמִשְׁפַּט הָאוּרִים” (במדבר כ״ז:כ״א).

On the phrase “אֶת מִשְׁפַּט בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל” —
Rashi explains two meanings:

First explanation:

• It refers to the instrument through which Israel was judged.
• Through it, they were instructed whether to act or refrain from action.

Second explanation (Midrashic):

• The breastplate atoned for those who perverted judgment.
• Therefore it is called “משפט,” referring to the pardon for distorted justice.

28:31 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ אֶת מְעִיל הָאֵפוֹד”
“And you shall make the robe of the ephod.”

Rashi explains:

• This is the robe worn beneath the ephod.
• The ephod was placed over it and girded around it.

On “כְּלִיל תְּכֵלֶת” —
The robe was entirely made of blue wool.

• No other material was mixed into it.

28:32 — “וְהָיָה פִי רֹאשׁוֹ בְּתוֹכוֹ”
“And the opening for its head shall be in its midst.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to the neck opening at the top of the robe.

On “בְּתוֹכוֹ” —
The opening was:

• Folded inward to form a reinforced edge.
• Woven as part of the garment.
• Not sewn with a needle.

On “כְּפִי תַחְרָא” —
This is like the opening of a coat of mail.

• Their armor had similar folded neck openings.

On “לֹא יִקָּרֵעַ” —
This was to prevent tearing.

Rashi adds:

• One who tears the robe violates a negative commandment.
• This is similar to:
  
  • “וְלֹא יִזַּח הַחֹשֶׁן” — the breastplate must not loosen.
  • “לֹא יָסֻרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ” — the poles of the Ark must not be removed.

28:33 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ עַל שׁוּלָיו רִמֹּנֵי תְכֵלֶת…”
“And you shall make on its hem pomegranates of blue…”

Rashi explains:

• The pomegranates were round and hollow.
• Shaped like egg-shaped decorative pomegranates.

On “וּפַעֲמֹנֵי זָהָב” —
These were:

• Gold bells.
• With clappers inside.

On “בְּתוֹכָם סָבִיב” —
Between every two pomegranates:

• One bell was placed.
• All around the hem of the robe.

28:34 — “פַּעֲמֹן זָהָב וְרִמֹּן…”
“A golden bell and a pomegranate…”

Rashi explains:

• A bell was placed next to each pomegranate.
• They alternated along the hem.

28:35 — “וְנִשְׁמַע קוֹלוֹ… וְלֹא יָמוּת”
“And its sound shall be heard… so that he shall not die.”

Rashi explains:

• From the negative, one can infer the positive.

If he wears the garments:

• He will not incur death.

But if he enters the Sanctuary:

• Lacking even one of these garments,
• He is liable to death at the hands of Heaven (סנהדרין פ״ג).

28:36 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ צִּיץ זָהָב טָהוֹר”
“And you shall make a plate of pure gold.”

Rashi explains:

• The ציץ was a golden plate.
• Two fingerbreadths wide.
• It extended across the forehead from ear to ear.

28:37 — “וְשַׂמְתָּ אֹתוֹ עַל פְּתִיל תְּכֵלֶת”
“And you shall place it on a blue cord.”

Rashi addresses several apparent contradictions in the verses:

• One verse says the cord is on the plate.
• Another says the plate is on the cord.
• One verse says it is on the mitre.
• Another says it is on Aharon’s forehead.

He explains the structure:

• Strings were attached through holes at both ends and the middle of the plate.
• Three strings in total, forming six strands.
• The ends were tied behind the neck.

The middle string:

• Passed over the top of the head.
• Secured the plate like a kind of helmet.

Thus:

• The plate sat on the forehead.
• The cord was attached to it.
• The cord also passed over the mitre.

In this way, all the verses are reconciled.

28:38 — “וְנָשָׂא אַהֲרֹן אֶת עֲוֹן הַקֳּדָשִׁים”
“And Aharon shall bear the iniquity of the holy things.”

Rashi explains:

The word “נשא” means:

• To bear.
• And also to forgive.

Thus:

• Aharon bears the burden of the iniquity.
• And thereby removes it from the holy offerings.

On “עֲוֹן הַקֳּדָשִׁים” —
The plate atoned for:

• The blood or fat of offerings
• That were offered while ritually impure.

It did not atone for:

• פיגול
• נותר
• Or the sin of an impure priest

Rather:

• It made the offering itself acceptable.

On “וְהָיָה עַל מִצְחוֹ תָּמִיד” —
Rashi explains:

It cannot mean literally always on his forehead:

• Since he only wore it during service.

Rather:

• “תמיד” refers to constant atonement.
• Even when he was not wearing it.

According to another opinion:

• It only atoned when on his forehead.
• Therefore he had to touch it frequently
• So as not to divert his attention from it.

28:39 — “וְשִׁבַּצְתָּ הַכְּתֹנֶת שֵׁשׁ”
“And you shall make the tunic of checkered linen.”

Rashi explains:

• It was made with many checkered designs.
• Entirely of fine linen.

28:40 — “וּלְבְנֵי אַהֲרֹן תַּעֲשֶׂה כֻּתֹּנֹת”
“And for Aharon’s sons you shall make tunics.”

Rashi explains that the ordinary Kohen wore four garments:

• Tunic
• Girdle
• Mitre (מגבעות)
• Breeches (mentioned later)

28:41 — “וְהִלְבַּשְׁתָּ אֹתָם אֶת אַהֲרֹן”
“And you shall dress them on Aharon.”

Rashi explains:

Aharon received the garments mentioned for him:

• Breastplate
• Ephod
• Robe
• Checkered tunic
• Mitre
• Girdle
• Plate
• Breeches

His sons received:

• The garments prescribed for them.

On “וּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֹתָם” —
They were anointed with the anointing oil.

On “וּמִלֵּאתָ אֶת יָדָם” —
This means consecration or installation into office.

Rashi explains:

• Whenever “filling the hand” is mentioned, it means initiation into service.
• In old French, a ruler would give a glove into a person’s hand when appointing him.
• This act symbolized his authority.
• That act parallels the meaning of “filling the hand.”

28:42 — “וַעֲשֵׂה לָהֶם מִכְנְסֵי־בָד”
“And make for them linen breeches.”

Rashi explains:

• This completes the total of garments.
• The Kohen Gadol had eight garments.
• The ordinary Kohen had four.

28:43 — “וְהָיוּ עַל אַהֲרֹן וְעַל בָּנָיו”
“And they shall be upon Aharon and upon his sons.”

Rashi explains:

• “They” refers to all the required garments.
• Aharon wore those designated for him.
• His sons wore those designated for them.

On “בְּבֹאָם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד” —
This refers to entering:

• The Mishkan
• Or later, the Temple

On “וּמֵתוּ” —
From this we learn:

• A priest who performs the service
• While lacking any required garment
• Is liable to death.

On “חֻקַּת עוֹלָם” —
Rashi explains:

• Whenever the Torah uses this phrase,
• It means an eternal ordinance
• For that time and for all generations.

It also indicates:

• That failure to perform the rite correctly
• Invalidates the service.

Chapter 28 Summary

In Chapter 28, Rashi explains the sacred garments of the Kohen Gadol and the ordinary Kohanim. He describes the structure and symbolism of each garment — the ephod, breastplate, robe, tunic, turban, girdle, and golden plate — and how these garments themselves effect the sanctification of the priest. Rashi provides detailed reconstructions of the ephod and breastplate, explaining their materials, construction, and fastening systems. He also teaches that the garments atone for specific sins and that the priestly service is invalid without them. Through these explanations, the chapter reveals how holiness is expressed through precise form, beauty, and order in the service of the Mishkan. 

Chapter 29

29:1 — “וְזֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה לָהֶם לְקַדֵּשׁ אֹתָם”
“And this is the matter that you shall do for them to sanctify them.”

On the word “לָקַח” — take —
Rashi explains:

• This form is equivalent to the imperative “קַח” — take.
• There are two grammatical forms:
  
  • קח
  • לקח
• Both share the same meaning.

On “פַּר אֶחָד” — one bullock —
Rashi explains:

• This bullock came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf.
• The calf was of the species of the bullock.
• Therefore, the offering corresponds to that sin.

29:2 — “וְלֶחֶם מַצּוֹת…”
“And unleavened bread…”

Rashi explains that three types of unleavened bread were brought:

• חלות מצות — pierced cakes
• רקיקי מצות — wafers
• לחם מצות — saturated cakes

The “לחם מצות” mentioned here is the same as the “חלת לחם שמן” mentioned later (verse 23):

• It is called this because oil was mixed into the dough.
• The amount of oil added equaled the total used for the other two types.

Each of the three types consisted of:

• Ten cakes per type.

On “בְּלוּלֹת בַּשֶּׁמֶן” — mingled with oil —
Rashi explains:

• While the mixture was still flour, oil was poured in.
• It was then thoroughly mixed.

On “מְשֻׁחִים בַּשֶּׁמֶן” — anointed with oil —
Rashi explains:

• After baking, the cakes were anointed with oil.
• The oil was applied in the shape of a Greek chi (Χ).

29:3 — “וְהִקְרַבְתָּ אֹתָם”
“And you shall bring them near.”

Rashi explains:

• They were brought to the courtyard of the Mishkan.
• This occurred on the day it was first erected.

29:4 — “וְרָחַצְתָּ”
“And you shall wash them.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to immersion of the entire body.
• Not merely washing the hands or feet.

29:5 — “וְאֶפְדַּתָּ לוֹ”
“And you shall fasten it upon him.”

Rashi explains:

• This means to arrange and adorn him.
• The girdle and ephod were properly fitted around him.

29:6 — “נֵזֶר הַקֹּדֶשׁ”
“The diadem of holiness.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to the golden plate (ציץ).

On “עַל הַמִּצְנֶפֶת” — upon the mitre —
Rashi refers back to his earlier explanation:

• The plate was attached by three strings.
• Two at the sides.
• One in the middle.
• They were tied behind the neck.
• The plate rested on the mitre like a helmet.

29:7 — “וּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֹתוֹ”
“And you shall anoint him.”

Rashi explains:

• The anointing was done in the form of a Greek chi (Χ).
• One drop of oil was placed on his head.
• Another between his eyebrows.
• The drops were then joined with the finger into this shape.

29:9 — “וְהָיְתָה לָהֶם”
“And it shall be for them.”

Rashi explains:

• This “filling of the hands” would establish an eternal priesthood.

On “וּמִלֵּאתָ” — and you shall fill —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to the acts of consecration that follow.

On “יָד אַהֲרֹן וְיָד בָּנָיו” — the hand of Aharon and the hand of his sons —
Rashi explains:

• This phrase refers to appointment and installation into the priesthood.

29:11 — “פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד”
“At the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to the courtyard of the Mishkan.
• It was located in front of the entrance.

29:12 — “עַל קַרְנֹת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ”
“Upon the horns of the altar.”

Rashi explains:

• The blood was placed directly on the tops of the horns.
• Not sprinkled from below.

On “וְאֶת כָּל הַדָּם” — all the blood —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to the remainder of the blood.

On “אֶל יְסוֹד הַמִּזְבֵּחַ” — at the base of the altar —
Rashi explains:

• The base was a projection around the altar.
• It served as a receptacle.
• It was located one cubit above the ground.

29:13 — “הַחֵלֶב הַמְכַסֶּה אֶת הַקֶּרֶב”
“The fat that covers the inwards.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to the membrane over the stomach.

On “וְאֶת הַיֹּתֶרֶת” — the lobe —
Rashi explains:

• This is the lobe of the liver.
• Some of the liver itself was also taken with it.

29:14 — “תִּשְׂרֹף בָּאֵשׁ”
“You shall burn it in fire.”

Rashi explains:

• This is unusual.
• No other external sin-offering was burned like this one.

29:16 — “וְזָרַקְתָּ”
“And you shall sprinkle.”

Rashi explains:

• The blood was sprinkled using a vessel.
• The priest stood on the ground.
• He cast the blood toward the horn so it appeared on both sides.

Only a sin-offering required:

• Application by finger directly to the horn.

Other offerings:

• Did not require finger application.
• Their blood was placed on the lower half of the altar.

On “סָבִיב” — round about —
Rashi explains:

• This means two applications that count as four.
• One on one corner.
• One on the diagonally opposite corner.
• Each application was visible on two sides.

Thus:

• The blood reached all four sides.

29:17 — “עַל נְתָחָיו”
“Upon its pieces.”

Rashi explains:

• This means together with its other pieces.
• It was added onto the rest of the parts.

29:18 — “רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ”
“A pleasing odor.”

Rashi explains:

• This means a pleasing spirit before Hashem.
• Because He commanded it.
• And His will was fulfilled.

On “אִשֶּׁה” — an offering by fire —
Rashi explains:

• This term is related to the word אֵשׁ — fire.
• It refers to the burning of the sacrificial parts on the altar.

29:20 — “תְּנוּךְ”
“The cartilage.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to the middle cartilage of the ear.

On “בֹּהֶן יָדָם” — the thumb of their hand —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to the thumb.
• The blood was applied to its middle joint.

29:22 — “הַחֵלֶב… וְאֶת שׁוֹק הַיָּמִין”
“The fat… and the right shoulder.”

On “החלב” — the fat —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to the fat of the entrails.
• According to Rabbi Yishmael, it refers to the fat of the maw (חולין מ״ט ב).

On “והאליה” — the fat tail —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to the portion from the kidneys downward.
• As explained in ויקרא ג׳:ט:
  
  • “לְעֻמַּת הֶעָצֶה יְסִירֶנָּה”
• This is the area where the kidneys give “counsel” (עצה).

Rashi notes:

• The fat tail is only offered from a sheep or ram.
• It is not offered from a bull or goat.
• Therefore, it was not mentioned in the earlier bull-offering.

On “ואת שוק הימין” — the right shoulder —
Rashi explains:

• Nowhere else do we find the right shoulder burned with the sacrificial fats.
• This occurred only in this inauguration offering.

On “כי איל מלאים הוא” — for it is a ram of consecration —
Rashi explains:

• The term מלאים is related to שלמים (peace-offerings).
• Both share the idea of completeness or perfection.

The consecration offering is like a peace-offering because:

• It creates harmony between:
  
  • The altar
  • The priest performing the service
  • The owner of the offering

Therefore:

• The breast was given to the officiating priest.
• In this case, that priest was Moshe.
• The rest was eaten by Aharon and his sons, who were the “owners.”

29:23 — “וְכִכַּר לֶחֶם… וְרָקִיק”
“And one loaf of bread… and one wafer.”

Rashi explains:

On “וככר לחם” — one loaf of bread:

• This refers to one of the cakes mentioned earlier.

On “וחלת לחם שמן” — a cake of oiled bread:

• This refers to the type called the “saturated” cake.

On “ורקיק” — one wafer:

• This was taken from the wafers previously mentioned.
• One wafer out of the ten from that category.

Rashi notes:

• Nowhere else do we find a heave-offering of bread burned on the altar.
• In other offerings, such as:
  
  • The thanksgiving offering
  • The Nazirite ram
• The bread was given to the priests together with the breast and shoulder.

Here:

• Only the breast was given to Moshe as the officiating priest.

29:24 — “עַל כַּפֵּי אַהֲרֹן… וְהֵנַפְתָּ”
“Upon the palms of Aharon… and you shall wave them.”

Rashi explains the waving procedure:

• Both the owner and the priest participate.
• The priest places his hands under the owner’s hands.
• Together they perform the waving.

In this case:

• Aharon and his sons were the “owners.”
• Moshe served as the priest.

On “תנופה” — a wave offering —
Rashi explains the symbolism:

• The offering is moved horizontally in all directions:
  
  • In honor of the One to Whom the four directions belong.
  • Symbolizing the prevention of harmful winds and calamities.
• It is also moved upward and downward:
  
  • In honor of the One to Whom heaven and earth belong.
  • Symbolizing protection from harmful dews.

29:25 — “עַל הָעֹלָה… לְרֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ”
“Beside the burnt-offering… as a pleasing aroma.”

Rashi explains:

On “על העלה” — beside the burnt-offering:

• This refers to the first ram already offered as a burnt-offering.

On “לריח ניחוח” — a pleasing aroma:

• It is a pleasing spirit before Hashem.
• Because His command was fulfilled.

On “אשה” — an offering by fire:

• This refers to something given over to the fire.

On “לה׳” — to Hashem:

• It is offered for the sake of the Divine Name.

29:27 — “וְקִדַּשְׁתָּ אֵת חֲזֵה הַתְּנוּפָה…”
“And you shall sanctify the breast of the wave-offering…”

Rashi explains:

• These portions are sanctified for future generations.
• The waving and heaving procedures will apply:
  
  • To the breast and shoulder of all peace-offerings.

However:

• The shoulder of regular peace-offerings is not burned.
• Instead, it is given to Aharon and his sons to eat.

On “תנופה” — waving:

• This refers to movement forward and backward.

On “תרומה” — heaving:

• This refers to movement upward and downward.

29:28 — “לְחָק עוֹלָם מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל”
“As a perpetual due from the children of Israel.”

Rashi explains:

• The peace-offering belongs to the owner.
• But the breast and shoulder are given to the priest.

On “כי תרומה הוא” — for it is a heave-offering:

• This refers specifically to these portions:
  
  • The breast
  • And the shoulder

29:29 — “לְבָנָיו אַחֲרָיו”
“For his sons after him.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to whoever succeeds him in the high priesthood.

On “למשחה” — for anointing:

• This word can also mean dignity or elevation.
• As in:
  
  • “לְךָ נְתַתִּים לְמָשְׁחָה” (במדבר י״ח)
  • “אַל תִּגְּעוּ בִּמְשִׁיחָי” (דברי הימים א ט״ז)

On “ולמלא בם את ידם” — to consecrate them through them:

• Through these garments, the priest is installed into the high priesthood.

29:30 — “שִׁבְעַת יָמִים יִלְבָּשָׁם הַכֹּהֵן”
“Seven days the priest shall wear them.”

Rashi explains:

On “שבעת ימים” — seven days:

• These must be consecutive days.
• This is the installation period of the High Priest.

On “ילבשם הכהן” — the priest shall wear them:

• This refers to the son who succeeds him as High Priest.

On “אשר יבא אל אהל מועד” — who enters the Tent of Meeting:

• This describes the priest qualified to enter the innermost sanctum on Yom Kippur.
• That is the High Priest, since only he may perform the Yom Kippur service.

On “תחתיו מבניו” — in his stead from among his sons:

• If the High Priest has a son capable of filling his role:
• He is appointed in his father’s place.

29:31 — “וְאֶת אֵיל הַמִּלֻּאִים תִּקָּח”
“And you shall take the ram of consecration.”

On “בְּמָקוֹם קָדֹשׁ” — in a holy place —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting.
• These peace-offerings were קדשי קדשים — holy of holies.

29:32 — “פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד”
“At the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.”

Rashi explains:

• The entire courtyard is called “the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.”

29:33 — “וְאָכְלוּ אֹתָם”
“And they shall eat them.”

Rashi explains:

• Aharon and his sons eat them.
• Because they are considered the “owners” of the offering.

On “אֲשֶׁר כֻּפַּר בָּהֶם” — through which atonement was made:

• This refers to everything that was strange or objectionable being atoned for.

On “לְמַלֵּא אֶת יָדָם” — to fill their hands:

• This refers to the ram and bread used in the consecration.

On “לְקַדֵּשׁ אֹתָם” — to sanctify them:

• Through these inauguration sacrifices, they were installed and sanctified into the priesthood.

On “כִּי קֹדֶשׁ הֵם” — for they are holy:

• They are קדשי קדשים — of the highest sanctity.
• From here we learn a prohibition:
  
  • A non-priest may not eat from these holy offerings.

29:35 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו כָּכָה”
“And you shall do thus to Aharon and his sons.”

Rashi explains:

• The Torah repeats this instruction to make it essential.
• If even one element is missing:
  
  • Their consecration is invalid.
  • Their service is disqualified.

On “שִׁבְעַת יָמִים תְּמַלֵּא יָדָם” — seven days you shall consecrate them:

• This means the same process and offerings must be repeated for seven days.

29:36 — “עַל הַכִּפֻּרִים”
“For the atonements.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to atonement for the altar.
• To cleanse it from anything improper or defiled.

He adds:

• The previous verse spoke about the consecration of the priests.
• But that referred only to offerings brought for them.
• It did not teach about offerings brought for the altar.

Therefore:

• This verse teaches that the bull offered for the altar’s atonement is also essential.
• If it is omitted, the consecration is invalid.

A Midrashic explanation adds:

• The altar needed atonement in case any stolen material had been donated for the Mishkan’s construction.

On “וְחִטֵּאתָ” — you shall purify:

• The Targum translates this as purification.
• Blood placed with the finger is called חיטוי (purification).

On “וּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֹתוֹ” — you shall anoint it:

• The anointing was done in the shape of a Greek chi (X).

29:37 — “וְהָיָה הַמִּזְבֵּחַ קֹדֶשׁ”
“And the altar shall be most holy.”

Rashi explains the meaning of its holiness:

“כָּל הַנֹּגֵעַ בַּמִּזְבֵּחַ יִקְדָּשׁ”
“Whatever touches the altar shall become holy.”

This teaches:

• Even an offering that became invalid after entering the courtyard:
  
  • If it was placed on the altar,
  • It becomes sanctified and must not be removed.

However:

• This applies only to offerings that were originally fit.
• But became invalid later (e.g., overnight, impurity, or improper intent).

It does not apply to animals:

• That were never fit at all,
• Such as those used for idolatry or other intrinsic disqualifications.

29:40 — “וְעִשָּׂרֹן סֹלֶת”
“A tenth measure of fine flour.”

Rashi explains:

• A tenth of an ephah equals:
  
  • Forty-three and one-fifth eggs in volume.

On “בְּשֶׁמֶן כָּתִית” — with beaten oil:

• This does not make beaten oil mandatory.
• It only makes it permissible.

Since earlier it says:

• “Beaten for the light” (27:20),
• One might think beaten oil is invalid for meal-offerings.

Therefore:

• This verse teaches that beaten oil is permitted for them.
• But not required.

Oil from ground olives is also valid.

On “רְבִיעִת הַהִין” — a quarter of a hin:

• This equals three logs.

On “וְנֶסֶךְ” — a libation:

• This was poured into silver bowls atop the altar.
• The wine flowed through small holes:
  
  • Onto the altar.
  • Then downward.
• In the Temple:
  
  • It flowed into underground channels.
• In the Mishkan:
  
  • It flowed down to the ground.

29:41 — “לְרֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ”
“As a pleasing aroma.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to the meal-offering.
• The meal-offering with its libation was entirely burned.
• Unlike most meal-offerings.

The order of offering:

• First the limbs of the animal.
• Then the meal-offering.

29:42 — “תָּמִיד”
“A continual offering.”

Rashi explains:

• “Continual” means daily, without interruption.
• No day may pass between the offerings.

On “אֲשֶׁר אִוָּעֵד לָכֶם” — where I shall meet with you:

Rashi gives two opinions:

1. Hashem spoke to Moshe from above the copper altar at the entrance.
2. Hashem spoke from above the Ark’s cover, as stated elsewhere.

Thus:

• The phrase may refer to the Tent of Meeting itself.
• Not specifically the altar.

29:43 — “וְנֹעַדְתִּי שָׁמָּה”
“And I will meet there.”

Rashi explains:

• Hashem will meet with them in speech.
• Like a king who appoints a place to meet his servants.

On “וְנִקְדַּשׁ בִּכְבֹדִי” — and it shall be sanctified by My glory:

Rashi explains:

• The Mishkan will be sanctified by the resting of the Shechinah.

A Midrashic interpretation:

• Read not “by My glory” (בכבודי),
• But “through My honored ones” (בכבודי).

This hints to:

• The future death of Aharon’s sons on the day of the Mishkan’s inauguration.
• As Moshe later said:
  
  • “Through those close to Me I will be sanctified.”

Rashi on Parshas Tetzaveh 29_31…

29:46 — “לְשָׁכְנִי בְּתוֹכָם”
“To dwell among them.”

Rashi explains:

• The entire purpose is:
  
  • That the Divine Presence should dwell among Israel.

Chapter 29 Summary

In Chapter 29, Rashi explains the seven-day inauguration of Aharon and his sons into the priesthood. He details the sacrifices, the anointing rites, and the symbolic procedures that establish their sacred role. The offerings atone for past sin, consecrate the priests, and sanctify the altar itself. Rashi also clarifies the portions of the offerings, the waving rituals, and the hereditary succession of the High Priest. The chapter culminates with the establishment of the daily continual offering, through which Hashem meets Israel and causes His Presence to dwell among them. 

Chapter 30:1-10

30:1 — “מִזְבֵּחַ מִקְטַר קְטֹרֶת”
“An altar for the burning of incense.”

On “מִקְטַר קְטֹרֶת” — for the burning of incense —
Rashi explains:

• This altar was designated to produce the smoke of the incense.
• Its purpose was the burning of the fragrant spices.

30:3 — “אֶת גַּגּוֹ”
“Its roof.”

Rashi explains:

• This altar had a top surface.
• The outer altar (the altar of burnt-offerings) did not have a solid top.
• Its hollow interior was filled with earth at each encampment.

On “זֵר זָהָב” — a crown of gold —
Rashi explains:

• This crown symbolized the crown of priesthood.

30:4 — “צַלְעֹתָיו”
“Its sides.”

Rashi explains:

• Here, the word means “corners,” not sides.
• This is evident from the phrase:
  
  • “עַל שְׁנֵי צִדָּיו” — on its two sides.
• Thus, the rings were placed on the two corners.

On “לְבָתִּים לַבַּדִּים” — for places for the staves —
Rashi explains:

• The rings served as receptacles for the carrying poles.

30:6 — “לִפְנֵי הַפָּרֹכֶת”
“Before the partition.”

Rashi explains:

• The curtain stretched across the entire width of the Mishkan.
• One might think the altar could be placed slightly north or south.
• Therefore the verse adds:
  
  • “לִפְנֵי הַכַּפֹּרֶת” — before the Ark cover.
• This teaches:
  
  • The incense altar had to be aligned directly with the Ark.
  • Positioned exactly in front of it, outside the curtain.

30:7 — “בְּהֵיטִיבוֹ”
“When he trims.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to cleaning the lamps of the Menorah.
• The Kohen removed the ashes of the burnt wicks.
• This was done every morning.

On “הַנֵּרֹת” — the lamps —
Rashi explains:

• The word means the lamp vessels themselves.
• Except where the Torah uses the term העלאה, which refers to lighting.

30:8 — “וּבְהַעֲלֹת אַהֲרֹן”
“And when Aharon lights.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to kindling the lamps.
• Causing the flame to ascend.

On “יִקְטִירֶנָּה” — he shall burn it —
Rashi explains:

• The incense was offered daily.
• Half was burned in the morning.
• Half in the afternoon.

30:9 — “לֹא תַעֲלוּ עָלָיו”
“You shall not offer upon it.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers specifically to the incense altar.
• Other offerings were brought only on the copper altar.

On “קְטֹרֶת זָרָה” — strange incense —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to any incense brought as a voluntary offering.
• All such offerings are considered “strange” to this altar.
• Only the prescribed incense was permitted.

On “וְעֹלָה וּמִנְחָה” — burnt-offering or meal-offering —
Rashi explains:

• The burnt-offering refers to animals or birds.
• The meal-offering refers to bread offerings.
• None of these were allowed on the incense altar.

30:10 — “וְכִפֶּר אַהֲרֹן”
“And Aharon shall make atonement.”

Rashi explains:

• This refers to the application of blood to the horns of the incense altar.

On “אַחַת בַּשָּׁנָה” — once a year —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to Yom Kippur.
• As described in the section of Acharei Mos:
  
  • “And he shall go out to the altar… and atone upon it” (ויקרא ט״ז:י״ח).

On “חַטַּאת הַכִּפֻּרִים” — the sin-offering of atonement —
Rashi explains:

• This refers to:
  
  • The bull
  • And the goat of Yom Kippur
• These atone for impurity of the Sanctuary and its offerings.

On “קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים” — most holy —
Rashi explains:

• The incense altar is sanctified only for this service.
• Not for any other sacrificial offerings.

Chapter 30:1-10 Summary

In the opening section of Chapter 30, Rashi explains the golden incense altar and its unique function. Unlike the outer altar, it is dedicated solely to the burning of the daily incense, placed directly in line with the Ark beyond the curtain. Rashi clarifies the morning and afternoon incense service, the prohibition against offering any other sacrifices on this altar, and the yearly atonement performed upon it on Yom Kippur. Through these explanations, the incense altar emerges as a vessel of refined, constant service, aligned with the inner sanctum and dedicated exclusively to the offering of the ketores. 

Summary of Rashi on Parshas Tetzaveh

Across Parshas Tetzaveh, Rashi presents the priestly service as a system of holiness built from precise materials, garments, offerings, and rituals. He explains how the Kohanim are sanctified through their garments and inauguration rites, how the daily offerings maintain a continual connection with Hashem, and how each vessel and altar has a defined and exclusive role. From the light of the Menorah to the smoke of the incense, every element of the Mishkan service expresses discipline, order, and devotion. Through Rashi’s commentary, the parsha becomes a blueprint for sanctity — showing how careful action, proper preparation, and faithful service create a dwelling place for the Divine Presence among Israel. 

📖 Source

• Rashi on Tetzaveh: 27:20-30:10

Ramban on Parshas Tetzaveh – Commentary

Introduction to Ramban on Parshas Tetzaveh

In Parshas Tetzaveh, Ramban presents the priesthood, its garments, and its inauguration as a profound synthesis of earthly service and heavenly symbolism. He reads the pesukim with careful linguistic precision, often challenging the interpretations of Rashi and Ibn Ezra, while uncovering deeper layers of meaning rooted in Midrash, halachah, and the hidden wisdom of the Torah. Throughout this parsha, Ramban explains the structure of the kehunah, the royal character of the priestly garments, the inner workings of the Urim ve’Tumim, and the spiritual purpose of the consecration offerings. His commentary reveals that the service of the Kohanim was not merely ceremonial, but a process of spiritual perfection, national atonement, and the revelation of the Shechinah within Israel.

Chapter 27

27:20 — “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זָךְ כָּתִית לַמָּאוֹר לְהַעֲלֹת נֵר תָּמִיד”

“And you shall command the children of Israel that they bring you pure olive oil, beaten for the light, to cause a lamp to burn continually.”

Ramban explains that the Torah uses the phrase “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה” here because, in the commands of the Mishkan, the Torah generally states “וְעָשִׂיתָ” — “and you shall make,” meaning through Moshe’s command. Therefore, here it states specifically, “and you yourself shall command them” that they bring the oil for the light.

The verse says that they should bring the oil, not that they should make it. This is because in the wilderness they had no practical means of producing olive oil. Therefore, they were instructed to bring oil that they already possessed. In fact, it was the princes (הנשיאים) who brought this oil, as described later (שמות ל״ה:כ״ז–כ״ח).

The expression “אֵלֶיךָ” — “unto you” — means that they were to bring the oil to Moshe himself so that he could examine it and determine whether it was pure and properly beaten. A similar expression appears in the verse:

“צַו אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ” (ויקרא כ״ד:ב׳),

where the oil is likewise brought to Moshe for inspection.

The phrase “מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל” indicates that the oil was to be taken from among the people — from whoever possessed it — similar to the earlier instruction:

“מֵאֵת כָּל אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִדְּבֶנּוּ לִבּוֹ” (שמות כ״ה:ב׳).

Ramban then connects this wording to other expressions in the parsha that emphasize Moshe’s personal involvement. For example:

“וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ אֶת אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ” (שמות כ״ח:א׳)
— Moshe himself is to summon Aharon and his sons and inform them of their elevation.

“וְעָשִׂיתָ לָהֶם בִּגְדֵי קֹדֶשׁ” (שמות כ״ח:ב׳)
— This does not mean Moshe would physically sew the garments, but that he would command the wise craftsmen to make them, as with all the Mishkan’s work.

“וְאַתָּה תְּדַבֵּר אֶל כָּל חַכְמֵי לֵב” (שמות כ״ח:ג׳)
— Moshe himself would speak to the wise-hearted artisans, because he would recognize their wisdom and determine which work should be assigned to each one.

Since the Torah had said “וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב” and “וְעָשִׂיתָ,” it therefore had to clarify “וְאַתָּה תְּדַבֵּר אֶל כָּל חַכְמֵי לֵב,” to indicate that the garments would be made by Moshe’s command, just like the rest of the Mishkan’s work, about which it says:

“רְאֵה קָרָאתִי בְשֵׁם בְּצַלְאֵל” (שמות ל״א:ב׳).

Ramban then turns to the phrase “לְהַעֲלֹת נֵר תָּמִיד” — “to cause a lamp to burn continually.”

Rashi explains that something done every night is called “תָּמִיד,” just as:

“עוֹלַת תָּמִיד” (במדבר כ״ח:ו׳)
— the continual burnt-offering, though it was brought only once each day.

Similarly, the daily meal-offering of the Kohen Gadol is called “תָּמִיד” (ויקרא ו:י״ג), even though half was offered in the morning and half in the evening.

However, in the case of the showbread, the word “תָּמִיד” refers to an unbroken period from Shabbos to Shabbos (שמות כ״ה:ל׳).

Ramban, however, cites the Midrash of Chazal, which differs from Rashi’s interpretation. In the Sifre (ריש בהעלותך), the Sages taught:

“יָאִירוּ שִׁבְעַת הַנֵּרוֹת” (במדבר ח׳:ב׳)
One might think they should burn forever; therefore the verse says:
“מֵעֶרֶב עַד בֹּקֶר” (ויקרא כ״ד:ג׳).

One might then think they burn from evening to morning and are then extinguished. Therefore the verse again states:
“יָאִירוּ שִׁבְעַת הַנֵּרוֹת.”

How is this reconciled?
The seven lamps burn from evening to morning, but:

“לִפְנֵי ה׳ תָּמִיד” (שם)
— this refers to the western lamp (נֵר מַעֲרָבִי), which burned continually, and from which the Menorah was kindled each evening.

Similarly, the Toras Kohanim teaches:

“לְהַעֲלֹת נֵר תָּמִיד”
— this refers to the western lamp, which burned perpetually.

The Sages further taught there that if the Kohen found the western lamp extinguished in the morning, he would clean it and rekindle it from the fire of the altar. This demonstrates that even during the day, the western lamp was lit, for it was meant to burn continuously.

In Maseches Tamid (ג:ט), it is taught:

The Kohen who merited to clean the Menorah would enter and find the two easternmost lamps burning. He would clean the others and leave those two burning.
If he found them extinguished, he would clean them and relight them from the others that were still burning, and only afterward clean the remaining lamps.

This anonymous Mishnah follows the opinion of Rabbi (מנחות צ״ח:) that the lamps were arranged east–west. According to his view:

The western lamp was the second lamp from the eastern side.

It was called “western” because it stood west of the first lamp.

Since the command “לִפְנֵי ה׳ תָּמִיד” applied to that lamp, the easternmost lamp also had to be lit, because the second lamp cannot be considered “western” unless the first stands to its east.

However, according to the opinion that the lamps were arranged north–south, the western lamp was the central lamp on the shaft of the Menorah. According to this view, only that central lamp was lit in the morning.

The overall principle, Ramban concludes, is that the phrase:

“לִפְנֵי ה׳ תָּמִיד”
— refers specifically to the western lamp, which burned continuously day and night.

Closing Summary

In this opening commentary, Ramban emphasizes Moshe’s direct role as commander, examiner, and organizer of the Mishkan’s sacred service, showing how the repeated phrase “וְאַתָּה” highlights his personal leadership. He also clarifies the meaning of “תָּמִיד” in the lighting of the Menorah, arguing from Midrash and halachic sources that the command refers specifically to the perpetually burning western lamp. Through close reading of the pesukim and the teachings of Chazal, Ramban reveals both the structure of Moshe’s authority and the inner continuity symbolized by the Menorah’s eternal light.

Chapter 28

Ramban’s commentary on Parshas Tetzaveh presents the kehunah and its garments as expressions of both earthly royalty and heavenly glory. He reads the pesukim with close linguistic attention, while also revealing deeper symbolic meanings, especially through the lens of “לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאָרֶת.” In these sections, Ramban explains the structure of the priesthood, the royal nature of the garments, the spiritual intention required in their making, and even the precise language describing how the breastplate is attached to the ephod.

28:1 — “וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ אֶת אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ וְאֶת בָּנָיו אִתּוֹ… לְכַהֲנוֹ לִי אַהֲרֹן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא אֶלְעָזָר וְאִיתָמָר בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן”

“And you shall bring near to yourself Aaron your brother, and his sons with him… to minister to Me as priests: Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron’s sons.”

Ramban explains that the verse specifically names Nadav, Avihu, Elazar, and Isamar to clarify a potential misunderstanding. One might think that once Aharon was anointed as Kohen, his sons would automatically become Kohanim through him. The verse therefore specifies them individually to teach that Moshe had to initiate them personally into the priesthood.

This means:

Only these four sons were anointed with Aharon.

Only they, and their future descendants, became the priestly line.

Others who were already born, such as Pinchas, were not automatically included at this stage, because only those anointed together with Aharon received the initial kehunah.

28:2 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ בִגְדֵי קֹדֶשׁ לְאַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאָרֶת”

“And you shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother, for honor and for beauty.”

Ramban explains that “לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאָרֶת” means that Aharon should appear distinguished and glorified through garments of dignity and beauty. These garments were designed in the form of royal clothing, like the attire worn by kings in the ancient world.

He supports this by citing various verses:

“כֶּחָתָן יְכַהֵן פְּאֵר” (ישעיה ס״א:י׳) — like a bridegroom wearing a priestly diadem.

The “כְּתֹנֶת פַּסִּים” of Yosef (בראשית ל״ז:ג׳), which was a richly woven garment associated with royalty.

The robe of Tamar:
“כִּי כֵן תִּלְבַּשְׁנָה בְנוֹת הַמֶּלֶךְ הַבְּתוּלֹת מְעִילִים” (שמואל ב י״ג:י״ח),
showing that royal daughters wore such garments.

The mitznefes (turban) was likewise a royal symbol:

“הָסִיר הַמִּצְנֶפֶת וְהָרִים הָעֲטָרָה” (יחזקאל כ״א:ל״א)

“וּצְנִיף מְלוּכָה” (ישעיה ס״ב:ג׳)

Similarly, the ephod and the choshen were royal garments, as indicated by:

“וְהַמְנִיכָא דִי דַהֲבָא עַל צַוְּארָךְ” (דניאל ה׳:ט״ז)

The tzitz was like a king’s crown:

“יָצִיץ נִזְרוֹ” (תהלים קל״ב:י״ח)

The materials themselves were royal:

Gold, purple, and blue.

“All glorious is the king’s daughter within; her garment is inwrought with gold” (תהלים מ״ה:י״ד).

“You shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold about your neck” (דניאל ה׳:ט״ז).

Even in later times, the color techeiles was reserved for kings:

“וּמָרְדֳּכַי יָצָא… בִּלְבוּשׁ מַלְכוּת תְּכֵלֶת” (אסתר ח׳:ט״ו).

Thus, the Kohen Gadol appeared as a royal figure, clothed in garments of sovereignty.

On the deeper level (“עַל דֶּרֶךְ הָאֱמֶת”), Ramban explains that “לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאָרֶת” refers not merely to human honor, but to the honor of Hashem Who dwells among Israel. The garments were made:

For the glory of the Divine Presence.

For the splendor of Israel’s spiritual strength.

He supports this with several verses:

“כִּי תִפְאֶרֶת עֻזָּמוֹ אָתָּה” (תהלים פ״ט:י״ח).

“בֵּית קָדְשֵׁנוּ וְתִפְאַרְתֵּנוּ” (ישעיה ס״ד:י׳).

“עֹז וְתִפְאֶרֶת בְּמִקְדָּשׁוֹ” (תהלים צ״ו:ו׳).

“לְפָאֵר מְקוֹם מִקְדָּשִׁי” (ישעיה ס׳:י״ג).

“In Israel will He glorify Himself” (ישעיה מ״ד:כ״ג).

Similarly, the garments of the ordinary Kohanim are also described as:

“לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאָרֶת” (שמות כ״ח:מ׳).

And regarding the offerings:

“יַעֲלוּ עַל רָצוֹן מִזְבְּחִי וּבֵית תִּפְאַרְתִּי אֲפָאֵר” (ישעיה ס׳:ז׳).

From this, Ramban explains:

The altar represents Divine will (רָצוֹן).

The Sanctuary is the house of Divine splendor.

Therefore, the garments had to be made with proper intention for their sacred purpose. It is possible, he says, that the craftsmen themselves needed inner intent while making them. This is why the Torah says:

“וְאַתָּה תְּדַבֵּר אֶל כָּל חַכְמֵי לֵב אֲשֶׁר מִלֵּאתִיו רוּחַ חָכְמָה” (שמות כ״ח:ג׳),

so that they would understand the significance of what they were making.

Ramban then cites a teaching of Chazal (יומא ס״ט.) that when Alexander the Great saw Shimon HaTzaddik, he said that this figure’s image had appeared before him in battle whenever he was victorious — illustrating the awe inspired by the priestly appearance.

28:5 — “וְהֵם יִקְחוּ אֶת הַזָּהָב…”

“And they shall take the gold…”

Ramban explains that until this point, the commands of the Mishkan were directed personally to Moshe:

“וְעָשִׂיתָ” — “you shall make.”

“תַּעֲשֶׂה” — “you shall make.”

But here, Moshe is told to speak to the wise-hearted craftsmen, and they themselves will make the garments. Therefore the verse says:

“וְהֵם יִקְחוּ אֶת הַזָּהָב”
— they themselves will receive the donations from the people and use them to make the garments.

This teaches that:

The donations were not to be weighed or counted out to them.

They were trusted individuals.

Ramban compares this to:

“וְלֹא יְחַשְּׁבוּ אֶת הָאֲנָשִׁים… כִּי בֶאֱמֻנָה הֵם עֹשִׂים” (מלכים ב י״ב:ט״ז).

He explains that this principle applied not only to the garments but to the entire construction of the Mishkan. Only on the first day does the Torah say:

“וַיִּקְחוּ מִלִּפְנֵי מֹשֶׁה” (שמות ל״ו:ג׳).

Even then, the craftsmen took everything from Moshe without an accounting. On subsequent days, the people brought donations directly to the craftsmen.

Therefore the verse states:

“מַרְבִּים הָעָם לְהָבִיא” (שמות ל״ו:ה׳),

because the people were bringing directly to them, not through Moshe. Only afterward did the craftsmen count and weigh the materials and report the totals to Moshe, as it says:

“וַיְהִי זְהַב הַתְּנוּפָה…” (שמות ל״ח:כ״ד).

28:28 — “וְלֹא יִזַּח הַחֹשֶׁן מֵעַל הָאֵפוֹד”

“And the breastplate shall not be loosened from the ephod.”

Ramban cites Rashi, who explains that the word “יִזַּח” means to break away or become detached, and that it is an Arabic expression, as explained by Dunash ben Labrat.

Ramban, however, offers his own explanation. He suggests that “יִזַּח” is related to the root of:

“בֵּית גֵּאִים יִסַּח ה׳” (משלי ט״ו:כ״ה),

“וּבוֹגְדִים יִסְּחוּ מִמֶּנָּה” (משלי ב׳:כ״ב),

which refer to tearing down, uprooting, or breaking away. The letters samech and zayin can interchange, just as in other words:

“יַעְלְזוּ חֲסִידִים” (תהלים קמ״ט:ה׳),

“נִתְעַלְּסָה בָּאֳהָבִים” (משלי ז׳:י״ח),

“וְנִתַּצְתֶּם” (דברים י״ב:ג׳),

“נָתְסוּ” (איוב ל׳:י״ג).

Similarly:

“וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת הַבַּיִת מַסָּח” (מלכים ב י״א:ו׳),

refers to guarding the watch so that it not be broken or disrupted.

He also connects this to:

“וּלְמֵזַח תָּמִיד יַחְגְּרֶהָ” (תהלים ק״ט:י״ט),

which refers to a curse girding a person until he is destroyed or broken by it.

And:

“אֵין מֵזַח עוֹד” (ישעיה כ״ג:י׳),

meaning there is no more breaking or scattering.

The term “הוֹרֵס” likewise describes someone who leaves his station and breaks formation:

“אַל יֶהֶרְסוּ אֶל ה׳ לִרְאוֹת” (שמות י״ט:כ״ד),

“מִמַּעֲמָדְךָ יֶהֶרְסֶךָ” (ישעיה כ״ב:י״ט).

Similarly:

“וּמְזִיחַ אֲפִיקִים רִפָּה” (איוב י״ב:כ״א),

refers to the destruction caused by rushing streams.

Ramban concludes by noting that the word “מֵזַח” is structurally similar to “מֵצַח” (forehead), both lacking a nun in the root. “מֵצַח” relates to strength or endurance, for the strength of the head lies in the forehead.

28:30 — “וְנָתַתָּ אֶל חֹשֶׁן הַמִּשְׁפָּט אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים”

“And you shall place into the breastplate of judgment the Urim and the Tumim.”

Ramban begins by addressing the opinion of Rabbi Avraham ibn Ezra, who attempted to explain the Urim ve’Tumim as physical objects crafted from gold or silver, similar to the astrological devices used by practitioners to discover hidden knowledge. Ramban rejects this explanation entirely, stating that it has no substance.

Instead, he accepts the view of Rashi: the Urim ve’Tumim were a written inscription of the Divine Name placed inside the fold of the choshen. For this reason, the breastplate had to be doubled, forming a pouch into which the sacred inscription was placed.

Ramban brings several proofs for this:

The Urim ve’Tumim are never mentioned in the work of the craftsmen.

In the descriptions of the garments’ construction, the Torah says:

“וַיַּעַשׂ אֶת הָאֵפוֹד” (שמות ל״ט:ב׳)

“וַיַּעַשׂ אֶת הַחֹשֶׁן” (שם ח׳)

But it never says, “and he made the Urim and the Tumim.”

If they had been a crafted object, the Torah would have described them in detail, or at least said: “And you shall make the Urim and the Tumim as you were shown on the mountain,” just as it did with other vessels.

Ramban adds a further linguistic proof. When the Torah commands the making of vessels not previously mentioned, it uses indefinite language:

“וְעָשׂוּ אֲרוֹן” — they shall make an ark.

“וְעָשִׂיתָ שֻׁלְחָן” — you shall make a table.

“וְעָשִׂיתָ מְנוֹרָה” — you shall make a Menorah.

But regarding the Urim ve’Tumim, the Torah says:

“וְנָתַתָּ… אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים”

using the definite article, as though they were already known. Moreover, there is no command to make them, only to place them into the choshen.

Additionally:

The Torah mentions them only in relation to Moshe.

It says in the command:
“וְנָתַתָּ אֶל חֹשֶׁן הַמִּשְׁפָּט…”

And in the actual performance:
“וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים” (ויקרא ח׳:ח׳).

This shows that:

They were not the work of craftsmen.

They were not donated by the people.

They were a secret given to Moshe from the mouth of the Almighty.

Moshe wrote them in holiness, or they were of heavenly origin.

For this reason, the Torah refers to them without explanation, just as it says:

“וַיַּשְׁכֵּן… אֶת הַכְּרֻבִים” (בראשית ג׳:כ״ד),

where the keruvim appear without prior description.

Thus, Moshe took the sacred inscription of the Urim ve’Tumim and placed it into the choshen after he had clothed Aharon with the ephod and the breastplate, as described:

“וַיִּתֵּן עָלָיו אֶת הָאֵפֹד…
וַיָּשֶׂם עָלָיו אֶת הַחֹשֶׁן,
וַיִּתֵּן אֶל הַחֹשֶׁן אֶת הָאוּרִים וְאֶת הַתֻּמִּים”
(ויקרא ח׳:ז׳–ח׳).

Ramban then explains the mechanism of the Urim ve’Tumim.

They consisted of sacred Divine Names.

Through the power of these Names, the letters engraved on the stones of the choshen would illuminate before the eyes of the Kohen who was asking for judgment, as in:

“וְשָׁאַל לוֹ בְּמִשְׁפַּט הָאוּרִים” (במדבר כ״ז:כ״א).

For example, when they asked:

“מִי יַעֲלֶה לָּנוּ…?” (שופטים א׳:א׳),

the Kohen would concentrate on the Names of the Urim, and letters would shine forth:

The letters of “יְהוּדָה” would light up.

For the word “יַעֲלֶה,” letters would appear:

י from לֵוִי

ע from שִׁמְעוֹן

ל from לֵוִי

ה from אַבְרָהָם (whose name was also engraved there according to Chazal, יומא ע״ג:).

Alternatively, the letter ה might appear again from יהודה.

However, even after the letters lit up, the Kohen still did not know their arrangement. From those letters, many meaningless combinations could be formed. At this point, the second component came into play:

The sacred Names called “תֻּמִּים.”

Through their power, the heart of the Kohen became perfect (תָּמִים) to understand the correct arrangement of the illuminated letters. While the letters still shone before him, he would concentrate on the Names of the Tumim, and the proper message would settle in his heart:

“יְהוּדָה יַעֲלֶה.”

This level of knowledge, Ramban explains, is a form of Ruach HaKodesh:

Below prophecy.

Above the level of a Bas Kol.

In the Second Beis HaMikdash, when prophecy had ceased, the Urim ve’Tumim also ceased, and only the Bas Kol remained (יומא כ״א:).

Ramban suggests that after Moshe placed the sacred Names into the choshen, their knowledge was transmitted to the great sages of Israel along with other secrets of the Torah.

This explains why:

David possessed an ephod (שמואל א כ״ג:ו׳).

It was similar in form to the ephod of Moshe.

It included a breastplate resembling the holy choshen.

However, it seems that David’s ephod was made of linen, as seen in:

“נַעַר חָגוּר אֵפוֹד בָּד” (שמואל א ב׳:י״ח).

“שְׁמֹנִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה אִישׁ נֹשֵׂא אֵפוֹד בָּד” (שמואל א כ״ב:י״ח).

A priest from among the sons of the prophets would wear it, and they would inquire through it, sometimes receiving an answer.

Ramban concludes by noting that although Ibn Ezra claimed that Rashi would have changed his view had he seen the responsum of Rabbeinu Hai, Ramban himself had seen it and concluded that it was Ibn Ezra who misunderstood it.

28:31 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ אֶת מְעִיל הָאֵפוֹד כְּלִיל תְּכֵלֶת”

“And you shall make the robe of the ephod entirely of blue.”

Ramban cites Rashi, who explains that the me’il was like a shirt, similar to the k’tonet, except that the k’tonet was worn next to the skin while the me’il was the outer shirt.

Ramban disagrees.

He argues that the me’il was not a shirt at all, but a wrapping garment, as indicated by verses:

“וְהוּא עוֹטֶה מְעִיל” (שמואל א כ״ח:י״ד).

“מְעִיל צְדָקָה יְעָטָנִי” (ישעיה ס״א:י׳).

The language of עֲטִיָּה (wrapping) applies to a cloak or covering, not to a shirt. Similarly:

“עוֹטֶה אוֹר כַּשַּׂלְמָה” (תהלים ק״ד:ב׳).

“וְעַל שָׂפָם יַעְטֶה” (ויקרא י״ג:מ״ה).

He also notes the Targum’s term “כַּרְדּוּנִין,” which refers to a wrapping garment, similar in concept to the ephod that covers half the body. If the me’il were a shirt, it would not resemble such a garment at all.

Another proof:

“וַיַּחֲזֵק בִּכְנַף מְעִילוֹ וַיִּקָּרַע” (שמואל א ט״ו:כ״ז).

This shows that the me’il had “corners” or skirts, unlike a shirt.

Ramban therefore explains the structure of the me’il:

It was a garment that wrapped the entire body from the neck down to the feet.

It had no sleeves.

It had a neck opening (“פִּי מְעִיל”) woven as part of the garment.

The front was split all the way down.

The wearer inserted his head through the neck opening.

Two front flaps (כנפיים) hung down and could be arranged as desired.

It resembled a cloak without a headpiece, whose front seam is split.

Because of this structure, the language of “wrapping” is always used in connection with the me’il.

Ramban then questions Rashi’s explanation regarding the bells and pomegranates. Rashi says that a bell was placed between every two pomegranates.

Ramban challenges this:

If so, the pomegranates serve no purpose.

If they were only decorative, why make them hollow like pomegranates? They could have been simple golden apples.

The Torah also does not describe how the bells would be hung.

Ramban therefore explains:

The bells were inside the pomegranates themselves.

The pomegranates were hollow, shaped like small unopened pomegranates.

The bells were hidden within them but visible from inside.

The Torah does not specify their number, but Chazal taught:

There were seventy-two bells.

Seventy-two clappers inside them.

Thirty-six on one side.

Thirty-six on the other.

(זבחים פ״ח.)

This also proves that the me’il was not like a shirt, but had front and back sections.

Ramban also disputes Rashi’s description of the mitznefes (turban). Rashi explains it as a dome-shaped helmet, because elsewhere the Torah calls them “מִגְבָּעוֹת,” translated as “helmets.”

Ramban argues this is incorrect.

Chazal taught that the mitznefes was sixteen cubits long.

This indicates:

It was a long cloth wrapped around the head.

Fold upon fold, like a turban.

The mitznefes of the Kohen Gadol is never called a migba’at.

Only the ordinary Kohanim are described with migba’ot.

Even these were essentially turbans, but wound in a way that formed a cap-like structure on the head.

Onkelos translates “migba’ot” as caps (קובעים), but Ramban explains that the term refers to the form produced by the wrapping, not a rigid helmet.

Therefore, the Sages consistently refer to both the Kohen Gadol and the ordinary Kohen as wearing a mitznefes in Toras Kohanim.

In Yoma (ע״א:), the Mishnah teaches:

The Kohen Gadol serves in eight garments.

The ordinary Kohen serves in four:

1. K’tonet (tunic)
2. Michnasayim (breeches)
3. Mitznefes (turban)
4. Avnet (belt)

The Kohen Gadol adds:

1. Choshen
2. Ephod
3. Me’il
4. Tzitz

28:35 — “וְנִשְׁמַע קוֹלוֹ בְּבֹאוֹ אֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ לִפְנֵי ה׳ וּבְצֵאתוֹ וְלֹא יָמוּת”
“And its sound shall be heard when he enters the holy place before Hashem and when he goes out, so that he not die.”

Rashi explains that from this negative phrase — “so that he not die” — we infer the positive:
If the garments are upon him, he does not incur death; but if he enters lacking one of the garments, he is liable to death.

Ramban rejects this explanation.

He argues that if the verse were teaching a general rule that serving without the required garments brings death, then the Torah should have stated this only after listing all eight garments of the Kohen Gadol. Instead, the verse appears here, after mentioning only three garments — the choshen, ephod, and me’il — before the Torah mentions the tzitz, k’tonet, mitznefes, avnet, and michnasayim.

Furthermore, the verse states:

“וּבְצֵאתוֹ” — “and when he goes out.”

But leaving the Sanctuary is not an act of service that would incur death for lacking garments. This weakens Rashi’s interpretation.

Ramban then cites Rashi’s explanation on the later verse:

“וְהָיוּ עַל אַהֲרֹן וְעַל בָּנָיו… וָמֵתוּ” (שמות כ״ח:מ״ג),

which teaches that a Kohen who serves lacking any of the required garments incurs death. Ramban concedes that this reading seems plausible from the simple meaning of the verse.

However, based on the discussions in the Gemara, Ramban says the Sages did not interpret it this way.

According to the conclusions of the Talmud:

The command and punishment apply equally to Aharon and his sons.

But they refer specifically to the michnasayim (linen breeches).

The Torah first commands their making:

“וַעֲשֵׂה לָהֶם מִכְנְסֵי בָד” (שמות כ״ח:מ״ב).

Then it commands their wearing:

“וְהָיוּ עַל אַהֲרֹן וְעַל בָּנָיו” (שמות כ״ח:מ״ג).

By contrast, the other garments were already commanded earlier, both in their making and in their being worn, as it says:

“וְהִלְבַּשְׁתָּ אֹתָם אֶת אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ…” (שמות כ״ח:מ״א).

Therefore:

The later verse about death refers specifically to the breeches.

The punishment mentioned there applies only to them.

Ramban supports this from the Gemara (Sanhedrin 83b; Zevachim 17b):

How do we know that a Kohen who serves lacking garments is liable to death?
From the verse:

“וְחָגַרְתָּ אוֹתָם אַבְנֵט… וְהָיְתָה לָהֶם כְּהֻנָּה” (שמות כ״ט:ט׳).

The Sages interpret:

When their garments are upon them, their priesthood is upon them.

When their garments are not upon them, their priesthood is not upon them.

They are then considered like non-priests (זר), and a non-priest who performs the service is liable to death.

If the verse in our parsha already clearly stated the punishment for lacking garments, the Sages would not have needed to derive it from another verse. This proves, according to Ramban, that the verse here refers only to the breeches, while the other verse teaches the law for the remaining garments.

He brings an additional proof:

Later, when the Torah describes the order of dressing the Kohen, it does not mention the breeches at all.

This is because:

Their penalty had already been stated earlier.

It was therefore understood that they must be worn, and no repetition was necessary.

Ramban then returns to the earlier phrase in our verse:

“וְנִשְׁמַע קוֹלוֹ… וְלֹא יָמוּת”
— “its sound shall be heard… so that he not die.”

He explains that this does not refer to the general rule of serving without garments. Rather, it explains the purpose of the bells on the me’il.

The bells are not necessary for the garment itself, nor are such ornaments typical for dignified clothing. Therefore, the Torah explains their purpose:

The sound is heard when the Kohen enters the Sanctuary.

This is like entering a king’s palace with permission.

One who suddenly enters the palace of a king is liable to death according to royal protocol, as seen in the case of Achashverosh (אסתר ד׳:י״א).

The bells therefore serve as an announcement:

As if the Kohen is calling out, “Remove all men from before me.”

This allows him to enter and serve the King alone.

Likewise, when he exits, the sound announces his departure, allowing the King’s attendants to return.

Ramban connects this idea to the teaching of the Yerushalmi (Yoma 1:5):

“וְכָל אָדָם לֹא יִהְיֶה בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד” (ויקרא ט״ז:י״ז)
— even the heavenly beings described as having the “face of a man” are not present when the Kohen Gadol enters.

Thus, the bells prevent him from encountering the angels of Hashem. This command is given because of his exalted role, as he stands before Hashem as:

“מַלְאַךְ ה׳ צְבָאוֹת” (מלאכי ב׳:ז׳)
— a messenger of Hashem of Hosts.

Ramban then cites a Midrash (שמות רבה ל״ח:ח׳) regarding the stones of the choshen:

The stones were placed there so that Hashem would look upon them when the Kohen entered on Yom Kippur and remember the merit of the tribes.

The Midrash gives a parable:

A prince’s tutor came to plead for the prince but feared the attendants might strike him.

The king dressed him in royal garments so that all would see and fear him.

So too, Aharon entered the Sanctuary surrounded by many merits, without which he could not enter, because the ministering angels were present there. Therefore, Hashem gave him garments resembling the Divine garments, as it says:

“וַיִּלְבַּשׁ צְדָקָה כַּשִּׁרְיָן” (ישעיה נ״ט:י״ז).

Even though the Kohen Gadol did not enter the innermost sanctuary in these garments, on Yom Kippur he still required them in the Ohel Mo’ed, for it says:

“וְכָל אָדָם לֹא יִהְיֶה בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד.”

28:37 — “וְשַׂמְתָּ אֹתוֹ עַל פְּתִיל תְּכֵלֶת, וְהָיָה עַל הַמִּצְנֶפֶת; אֶל מוּל פְּנֵי הַמִּצְנֶפֶת יִהְיֶה”
“And you shall place it on a thread of techeiles, and it shall be upon the mitznefes; opposite the front of the mitznefes it shall be.”

Rashi explains the arrangement of the tzitz and its strings by reconciling several verses. In one place it says that the string was placed upon the tzitz, and here it says the tzitz was placed upon the string. Elsewhere it says it was upon the mitznefes, and also that it was upon Aharon’s forehead. From these verses and from the teaching of the Gemara (Zevachim 19a), Rashi constructs a complex system:

The mitznefes sat high on the crown of the head, leaving space below for the tzitz.

The tzitz was positioned beneath it, across the forehead.

There were three holes in the tzitz: at both ends and in the middle.

Six strings were threaded through these holes.

They were tied behind the neck and also passed over the top of the head.

Together, the strings and plate formed a helmet-like structure.

The middle string, which passed over the top of the head, is what the verse means when it says the tzitz was “upon the mitznefes,” while the plate itself rested on the forehead.

Ramban challenges Rashi’s explanation on several grounds.

First, he argues from the simple meaning of the verse:

The Torah commands only one thread of techeiles.

Rashi’s system creates six threads.

Ramban says this results from Rashi combining verses of command and verses of fulfillment and multiplying threads to match them. By that method, he argues, one could similarly multiply parts of the ark, table, or menorah, since they are mentioned both in the command and in the execution.

Second, Ramban questions the direction of the language:

If the Torah commanded that the tzitz be placed upon a thread, how did they place a thread upon the tzitz?

Where is such a command given?

He also asks why middle strings would be necessary at all, since frontlets are normally tied behind the neck with a single string.

Ramban therefore presents a simpler reconstruction.

According to him:

There was only one thread.

The tzitz extended from ear to ear.

It was pierced at its two ends.

A single thread of techeiles passed through the holes.

It was tied behind the neck.

The mitznefes was then wrapped around the head, not on the forehead at all, but higher, on the crown where the hair grows.

Based on the teaching of Chazal, part of the hair at the front of the head remained exposed for the placement of tefillin. The mitznefes was therefore wound high on the crown of the head, covering the back of the head.

The arrangement was thus:

The mitznefes sat high on the head.

The tzitz lay directly across the forehead from ear to ear, with nothing intervening.

Behind the head, from ear to ear across the nape of the neck, the mitznefes was present.

The thread that tied the tzitz behind the neck rested upon the mitznefes in that area.

This explains the verses:

“And you shall place it on a thread of techeiles”
— meaning, insert the thread into the holes of the tzitz.

“And it shall be upon the mitznefes”
— meaning, the thread rests upon the mitznefes at the back of the head.

“Opposite the front of the mitznefes it shall be”
— meaning, the tzitz is on the forehead, aligned with the front of the mitznefes.

Ramban explains further verses in this light:

“And you shall set the mitznefes upon his head” (29:6)
— meaning, on the top of the head, not like the “migba’ot” of the ordinary Kohanim, which bind the head like a cap.

“And you shall place the holy crown upon the mitznefes”
— meaning, it is tied to it at the back.

“And they placed upon it a thread of techeiles to fasten it upon the mitznefes above” (39:31)
— meaning, the knot was tied on the mitznefes.

“And he placed the golden plate upon the mitznefes, opposite the front” (Vayikra 8:9)
— meaning, the tzitz was tied onto the mitznefes but positioned across the forehead.

Thus, in all verses, “placing” refers to the tying of the thread onto the mitznefes, while the tzitz itself rests on the forehead.

Ramban also resolves the difference in language:

“And they placed upon it a thread of techeiles”
and
“And you shall place it on a thread of techeiles.”

He explains that both mean essentially the same thing:

To attach the tzitz with a thread of techeiles.

The word “עַל” (“on”) can sometimes mean “with,” “in,” or even “to,” as in other verses. The essential meaning is simply that the thread is inserted into the holes of the tzitz and used to secure it.

He concludes with a parallel case:

The verse about attaching the choshen to the ephod with a thread of techeiles also refers to only one thread in each place, not multiple threads. There were two attachment points, each with a single thread.

28:41 — “וְהִלְבַּשְׁתָּ אֹתָם אֶת אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ וְאֶת בָּנָיו אִתּוֹ… וּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֹתָם וּמִלֵּאתָ אֶת יָדָם וְקִדַּשְׁתָּ אֹתָם וְכִהֲנוּ לִי”
“And you shall clothe them—Aaron your brother and his sons with him… and you shall anoint them, and you shall fill their hands, and you shall sanctify them, and they shall serve Me as priests.”

Rashi explains the phrase:

“וְהִלְבַּשְׁתָּ אֹתָם… אִתּוֹ”
— “with him” — meaning that all of them were clothed in their priestly garments and anointed on the same day.

On the phrase:

“וּמִלֵּאתָ אֶת יָדָם”
— “and you shall fill their hands,”

Rashi explains that every expression of “filling the hand” refers to initiation into office, when a person first enters a position that he will hold from that day onward.

Ramban objects to this explanation.

He questions how the literal expression “filling the hands” comes to mean installation or initiation. Rashi had suggested that in the old French language, when someone was appointed to an office, the ruler placed a leather glove (called a “gant”) into his hand, thereby granting him authority, and this custom was called “filling the hand.”

Ramban responds critically:

He is unsure whether Rashi means that the Torah term was derived from that foreign custom.

If so, the argument would be reversed: that custom itself was derived from the Torah.

He connects it to the Torah’s concept of acquisition by exchange, as in the story of Boaz:

“שָׁלַף אִישׁ נַעֲלוֹ” (רות ד׳:ז׳)
— “a man drew off his shoe.”

This, Ramban says, is how the scholars of that culture explained the act: the redeemer gave his glove to Boaz as a symbolic transfer. Thus, the custom is rooted in the Torah, not the other way around. Ramban dismisses the linguistic argument as unnecessary speculation.

Ramban then presents his own explanation of the phrase “מִלּוּי יָדַיִם.”

He explains that in the Torah, this expression refers to completion or perfection, as seen in several verses:

“כִּי מָלְאוּ יָמָי” (בראשית כ״ט:כ״א)
— “for my days are completed.”

“וּבִמְלֹאת הַיָּמִים הָאֵלֶּה” (אסתר א׳:ה׳)
— “when these days were fulfilled.”

“עַד יוֹם מְלֹאת” (ויקרא ח׳:ל״ג)
— “until the days are completed.”

Similarly:

“בְּכֶסֶף מָלֵא” (בראשית כ״ג:ט׳)
— “for the full price.”

Thus, “מִלּוּי יָדַיִם” means the perfection or completion of one’s capacity to perform a task.

A non-priest, who is not fit to offer a sacrifice or serve in the royal service, has a “lacking hand” in that function. But once he becomes fit for the service, his hand becomes “full” — complete and empowered for the work.

This explains the verse:

“מִלְאוּ יֶדְכֶם הַיּוֹם” (שמות ל״ב:כ״ט)
— usually translated “consecrate yourselves today.”

Ramban explains that it means:

“Now your hands are full with all the service of Hashem,”
because you have served Him even against your sons and brothers.

Alternatively, Moshe was hinting that through this merit, the tribe of Levi would be chosen for Divine service, as it says:

“בָּעֵת הַהִיא הִבְדִּיל ה׳ אֶת שֵׁבֶט הַלֵּוִי” (דברים י׳:ח׳).

Ramban then brings a parallel from King David. When David donated from his own treasure for the future Beis HaMikdash, he said:

“וּמִי מִתְנַדֵּב לְמַלֹּאות יָדוֹ הַיּוֹם לַה׳” (דברי הימים א כ״ט:ה׳)
— “Who then offers willingly to fill his hand today for Hashem?”

This means:

Who wishes to perfect his hand today for Hashem?

Through donating to the building of the Beis HaMikdash, their hands become “full” with all the sacrifices and services, for the service of Israel is only complete in the Sanctuary.

Similarly, the “ram of milu’im” mentioned later in the parsha is called so because through it the priest’s service is completed. The sin-offering and burnt-offering atone, but this ram fills the priest’s hand with the right to perform offerings.

Ramban notes that the Targum Yerushalmi translates:

“אֵיל הַמִּלּוּאִים”
as
“דְּאַשְׁלָמוּתָא”
— “the ram of perfection.”

Likewise, it consistently translates all forms of “milui yadayim” as expressions of perfection or completion.

Onkelos, however, translates according to the practical sense of the subject rather than preserving the literal wording, as is his general approach in many places.

Some commentators explain “וּמִלֵּאתָ אֶת יָדָם” as meaning that their hands would be filled with portions of the sacrifices. For example:

“הֶחָפֵץ יְמַלֵּא אֶת יָדוֹ” (מלכים א י״ג:ל״ג)
— meaning that one could fill his hands at will from the offerings.

But Ramban concludes that the correct interpretation is his own:

“מִלּוּי יָדַיִם” means perfection or completion.

Thus, when the verse says:

“הֶחָפֵץ יְמַלֵּא אֶת יָדוֹ וִיהִי כֹּהֲנֵי בָמוֹת” (שם),
it means that a person would bring for himself an installation-offering, as he devised, in order to initiate himself into the priesthood of the high places. After that, he would serve as a priest there, imitating the forms of the Torah’s service.

Chapter 28 Summary

In this chapter, Ramban explains the priestly garments as expressions of both royal dignity and Divine glory. He shows that the garments of the Kohen Gadol were fashioned after the attire of kings, symbolizing sovereignty and splendor, while also serving as vessels for the revelation of the Shechinah. He clarifies the structure of the priesthood, the trust placed in the wise-hearted craftsmen, and the deeper meaning of the Urim ve’Tumim as sacred Divine Names through which judgment was revealed. Ramban also analyzes the physical design of the priestly garments—the me’il, the mitznefes, the tzitz, and the breastplate—often disputing earlier interpretations and offering readings grounded in language, halachah, and symbolism. Through this, he presents the Kohen Gadol as a figure who stands between heaven and earth, clothed in garments that embody both royal authority and spiritual perfection.

Chapter 29

29:3 — “וְהִקְרַבְתָּ אוֹתָם בַּסָּל… אֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וְרָחַצְתָּ אֹתָם בַּמָּיִם”
“And you shall bring them in the basket… to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and you shall wash them with water.”

Ramban explains that the phrase:

“וְהִקְרַבְתָּ אוֹתָם בַּסָּל”
— “and you shall bring them in the basket,”

may be connected to the following verse, teaching that Moshe was to bring the bread in the basket, together with the bull, the rams, and Aharon and his sons, to the entrance of the Ohel Mo’ed, and there wash them with water.

However, Ramban says a more correct interpretation is that the phrase “and you shall bring them in the basket” is left intentionally unspecified. It is self-evident that they would be brought to the place where the priests were commanded to assemble. It would have been sufficient for them to come before the entrance to the courtyard of the Mishkan.

The next verse then refers specifically to Aharon and his sons. Therefore it states:

“וְרָחַצְתָּ אֹתָם בַּמָּיִם”
— “and you shall wash them with water,”

meaning Aharon and his sons themselves.

29:7 — “וְלָקַחְתָּ אֶת שֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה וְיָצַקְתָּ עַל רֹאשׁוֹ”
“And you shall take the anointing oil and pour it upon his head.”

Ibn Ezra explains that this pouring of the oil occurred before placing the mitznefes on Aharon’s head, since the oil was poured directly upon his head.

Ramban rejects this interpretation.

He points to the actual narrative of the consecration, where the order is:

First, the mitznefes is placed on Aharon’s head (ויקרא ח:ט).

Afterward, the anointing oil is taken and used to anoint the Mishkan and its vessels.

Only afterward does it say:
“וַיִּצֹק מִשֶּׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה עַל רֹאשׁ אַהֲרֹן” (ויקרא ח:י״ב).

Therefore, the oil must have been poured while the mitznefes was already in place.

Ramban explains the process:

The mitznefes was wrapped around and around the head.

The middle of the head was left exposed.

The oil was poured onto that exposed area.

If, however, the anointing covered the entire head, as Rashi describes, then the pouring would have occurred on the place where the tefillin are worn, which was left uncovered. From there, the oil would be drawn with the finger to form the shape of a Greek chi (Χ) across the forehead.

29:9 — “וְחָגַרְתָּ אֹתָם אַבְנֵט… וְחָבַשְׁתָּ לָהֶם מִגְבָּעוֹת”
“And you shall gird them with belts… and you shall bind caps upon them.”

Ramban cites Ibn Ezra, who explains that the verse first refers generally to Aharon and his sons, and then returns to specify them again, as in similar constructions:

“יְבִיאֶהָ אֵת תְּרוּמַת ה׳” (שמות ל״ה:כ״ד)

“אֲשֶׁר לֹא יַעַבְדוּ אֹתוֹ אֶת נְבוּכַדְנֶאצַּר” (ירמיה כ״ז:ח׳)

According to this reading, the phrase:

“וְחָבַשְׁתָּ לָהֶם מִגְבָּעוֹת”
— “and you shall bind caps upon them,”

applies only to some of them—namely, Aharon’s sons—because Aharon himself does not wear a migba’at. He wears the mitznefes, which was already placed on his head earlier.

Ramban suggests another possible reading:

“וְחָגַרְתָּ אוֹתָם אַבְנֵט וְאַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו”
— meaning, you shall gird Aharon’s sons with belts, and Aharon himself with them.

The belt was the same for both Aharon and his sons (יומא י״ב:), so it was not mentioned earlier among Aharon’s special garments. Therefore, the Torah now clarifies that he too was girded with a belt like his sons.

The breeches are not mentioned here, Ramban says, because that was unnecessary, as he explained earlier (כ״ח:ל״ה).

The reason they are separated from the other garments is:

Moshe clothed them in all the other garments.

But the breeches, which cover the flesh of nakedness (כ״ח:מ״ב), were put on privately by the priests themselves.

Therefore they are not included in the command:

“וְהִלְבַּשְׁתָּם”
— “and you shall clothe them.”

For this reason, the Torah separated them from the other garments in both command and punishment, as Ramban explained earlier.

29:10 — “וְהִקְרַבְתָּ אֶת הַפָּר לִפְנֵי אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד… וְסָמַךְ אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו”
“And you shall bring the bull before the Tent of Meeting… and Aharon and his sons shall lay their hands upon it.”

Ibn Ezra explains that the verse means: when you bring the bull before the Tent of Meeting, Aharon and his sons shall lay their hands upon it. The bringing of the bull was already mentioned earlier.

Ramban says the correct explanation is as he stated previously:

Earlier, the Torah commanded that they be brought, but did not specify that this was to the Tent of Meeting.

It only required bringing them to the place of the priests, where they would be ready for the service.

It would have been sufficient for them to stand before the entrance of the courtyard.

Now, however, the Torah requires that they be brought before the Tent of Meeting itself, to the entrance of the Ohel, as will be explained in connection with the slaughter:

“וְשָׁחַטְתָּ אֶת הַפָּר לִפְנֵי ה׳” (שמות כ״ט:י״א),

for that is the place where the laying of hands occurs.

29:13 — “וְלָקַחְתָּ אֵת כָּל הַחֵלֶב הַמְכַסֶּה אֶת הַקֶּרֶב…”
“And you shall take all the fat that covers the inwards…”

Rashi explains that this refers to the membrane over the stomach, called “tele” in Old French.

Ramban agrees that the phrase refers to the membrane. However, when the Torah says:

“כָּל הַחֵלֶב הַמְכַסֶּה אֶת הַקֶּרֶב”
— “all the fat that covers the inwards,”

it includes two kinds of fat:

The membrane fat.

The heavy fat upon the inwards.

This is clear from Vayikra (ג:ג):

“וְאֶת הַחֵלֶב הַמְכַסֶּה אֶת הַקֶּרֶב וְאֵת כָּל הַחֵלֶב אֲשֶׁר עַל הַקֶּרֶב.”

Thus, sometimes the Torah mentions both types explicitly, and sometimes it includes them both under the word “כָּל” (“all”).

Here, by saying “all the fat that covers the inwards,” the Torah includes both types.

In the actual performance of this command, it says:

“וַיִּקַּח אֶת כָּל הַחֵלֶב אֲשֶׁר עַל הַקֶּרֶב” (ויקרא ח:ט״ז),

again including both types under a single phrase.

Later in this same parsha (שמות כ״ט:כ״ב), it says:

“וְלָקַחְתָּ מִן הָאַיִל הַחֵלֶב… וְאֶת הַחֵלֶב הַמְכַסֶּה אֶת הַקֶּרֶב,”

where the first “fat” mentioned without specification refers to the heavy fat upon the inwards.

29:14 — “וְאֵת בְּשַׂר הַפָּר וְאֶת עֹרוֹ וְאֶת פִּרְשׁוֹ תִּשְׂרֹף בָּאֵשׁ מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה, חַטָּאת הוּא”
“And the flesh of the bull, its hide, and its refuse you shall burn with fire outside the camp; it is a sin-offering.”

Rashi notes that we do not find any external sin-offering that is burned outside the camp except this one.

Ramban explains that this was a temporary ruling, as the Sages taught.

The reason is:

This sin-offering atoned for the sin of the Golden Calf.

It was the offering of the anointed priest (ויקרא ד:ג׳).

In Vayikra, the Torah commands that the blood of the sin-offering of the anointed priest be brought inside the Sanctuary and sprinkled before the curtain.

However, here the Torah did not command that, because:

The Mishkan had not yet been sanctified.

The Shechinah had not yet come to dwell there.

It could not yet be called:

“פָּרֹכֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ.”

Therefore, the outer sin-offering here functioned like the inner sin-offering of the anointed priest described later.

The laying of hands was also done by Aharon’s sons, even though it was Aharon’s sin-offering, because:

Hashem had been angry with Aharon to destroy him (דברים ט:כ׳).

This is interpreted as the destruction of his children (ויקרא רבה ז:א).

Therefore, they too required atonement through this sin-offering.

The reason the offering was burned outside the camp is the same as the reason for the burning of the Parah Adumah. Its secret is connected to the mystery of the scapegoat sent to Azazel.

Closing Summary

In this section, Ramban clarifies the details of the inauguration rites of Aharon and his sons. He interprets the sequence of their presentation, the anointing, and the dressing of their garments, often disagreeing with Ibn Ezra and Rashi in favor of readings anchored in the actual order of the narrative. He also explains the sacrificial details of the consecration offerings, showing how the bull of the sin-offering atoned for the sin of the Golden Calf and why it was burned outside the camp. Through these explanations, Ramban reveals the inauguration as both a technical ritual of priestly empowerment and a deep act of national atonement.

29:26 — “מֵאֵיל הַמִּלֻּאִים אֲשֶׁר לְאַהֲרֹן”
“Of the ram of consecration which is Aaron’s.”

Ramban notes that the verse mentions only Aharon, even though the ram was for the consecration of both Aharon and his sons. He explains that the Torah emphasizes Aharon because of the breast of the wave-offering mentioned here.

Ordinarily, the breast of such an offering belongs to the Kohen, not to the owner of the animal. But in this case, Aharon and his sons were the owners of the ram, and Moshe was acting as the officiating Kohen. Therefore, the breast of the offering properly belonged to Moshe.

Since the Torah had already explained why the portion did not belong to Aharon, it was unnecessary to state separately that it also did not belong to his sons, because they follow him in their rights.

Later, however, the Torah states:

“מֵאֲשֶׁר לְאַהֲרֹן וּמֵאֲשֶׁר לְבָנָיו” (שמות כ״ט:כ״ז)

This indicates that just as Moshe took the breast and the thigh from the consecration offering that belonged to them, so too in the future Aharon and his sons would take these portions from the peace-offerings brought by the people.

29:29 — “לְמָשְׁחָה בָהֶם”
“To be anointed in them.”

Rashi explains that “anointing” here refers to elevation to authority or dignity, since in Israel authority belongs to the anointed — the king and the Kohen Gadol. Thus the term “anointing” is sometimes used metaphorically to mean appointment or authority.

Ramban accepts that this may be true in some contexts, but argues that here the literal meaning applies.

Here, the verse means:

The garments are used to anoint the High Priests who will succeed Aharon.

Through these garments they are consecrated to offer the sacrifices.

He supports this from other verses where “anointing” refers to actual anointing or consecration, not metaphorical appointment. Even in cases like the anointing of foreign kings or prophets, Ramban suggests that actual anointing may have taken place to signify Divine designation.

29:31 — “וּבִשַּׁלְתָּ אֶת בְּשָׂרוֹ בְּמָקוֹם קָדֹשׁ”
“And you shall cook its flesh in a holy place.”

Ramban explains that it is unclear whether this was a temporary instruction — that the ram of consecration be cooked only by a Kohen (in this case, Moshe) — or whether the verse means “you shall cause it to be cooked,” by commanding others to do so, as Ibn Ezra suggests.

In any case, the cooking had to take place in a holy area, because the offering was similar to communal peace-offerings, which were eaten within the courtyard and only until midnight.

29:36 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ פַּר חַטָּאת לַיּוֹם עַל הַכִּפֻּרִים”
“And you shall offer a bull of sin-offering each day for atonement.”

Rashi explains that this was to atone for the altar itself, in case anything unfit or stolen had been used in the construction of the Mishkan or in the offerings brought upon the altar.

Ramban disagrees with this explanation.

He explains that the phrase:

“עַל הַכִּפֻּרִים”
means that the sin-offering of the bull was brought in addition to the two rams, which atoned for Aharon and his sons.

As the verse says:

“וְאָכְלוּ אֹתָם אֲשֶׁר כֻּפַּר בָּהֶם” (שמות כ״ט:ל״ג)

And elsewhere:

“כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה בַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה צִוָּה ה׳ לַעֲשֹׂת לְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם” (ויקרא ח:ל״ד)

Thus, the bull itself was part of the atonement for the priests.

29:46 — “לְשָׁכְנִי בְּתוֹכָם”
“That I may dwell among them.”

Rashi explains this to mean:

“On condition that I dwell among them.”

Ramban rejects this interpretation, arguing that the Hebrew letter ל (lamed) is not used in Scripture to indicate a condition in this way.

Instead, he suggests the verse means:

“They will know, when I dwell among them, that I am Hashem their G-d who brought them out of the land of Egypt.”

In other words, the experience of the Divine Presence among them will confirm the truth of the Exodus and reveal Hashem’s glory.

Ibn Ezra offers another explanation:

The entire purpose of the Exodus was so that Hashem would dwell among them.

This fulfills the earlier promise:

“תַּעַבְדוּן אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים עַל הָהָר הַזֶּה” (שמות ג׳:י״ב).

Ramban praises this interpretation and says it contains a great secret.

At first glance, it might seem that the Divine Presence in Israel exists for the benefit of the people. But Ramban explains that, in truth, it is a “need above,” not a “need below.” It expresses the Divine glory in the world, as the verse says:

“יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר בְּךָ אֶתְפָּאָר” (ישעיה מ״ט:ג׳)
“Israel, in whom I will be glorified.”

Similarly:

“וּמַה תַּעֲשֵׂה לְשִׁמְךָ הַגָּדוֹל” (יהושע ז׳:ט׳)

And:

“אִוָּהּ לְמוֹשָׁב לוֹ… פֹּה אֵשֵׁב כִּי אִוִּתִיהָ” (תהלים קל״ב:י״ג–י״ד)

Thus, the dwelling of the Shechinah among Israel expresses the Divine purpose and glory in the world.

Closing Summary

In this concluding section, Ramban clarifies the priestly portions of the consecration offering, explains the meaning of anointing as a literal act of sanctification through the garments, and analyzes the atonement offerings of the inauguration. He ends with a profound theological insight: the ultimate purpose of the Exodus was the dwelling of the Shechinah among Israel. This indwelling is not merely for human benefit, but a revelation of Divine glory, through which the world recognizes Hashem’s presence.

Chapter 29 Summary

In this chapter, Ramban explores the inauguration of Aharon and his sons as a process of consecration, atonement, and spiritual completion. He explains the order of their presentation, washing, anointing, and vesting, often correcting earlier interpretations by anchoring his explanations in the actual sequence of the Torah’s narrative. He interprets “מִלּוּי יָדַיִם” not as a foreign idiom for appointment, but as the completion and perfection of the priest’s ability to serve. The consecration offerings, especially the sin-offering of the bull, are shown to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf and to prepare the priests for their sacred role. Ramban concludes the chapter with a profound theological insight: the ultimate purpose of the Exodus was the dwelling of the Shechinah among Israel, for through Israel, the Divine glory is revealed in the world.

Chapter 30

30:1 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ מִזְבֵּחַ מִקְטַר קְטֹרֶת”
“And you shall make an altar for the burning of incense.”

Ramban observes that the altar of incense was one of the inner vessels of the Sanctuary. Logically, it should have been mentioned earlier, together with the table and the menorah, since it stood alongside them in the inner chamber. Indeed, at the time of the actual construction, in Parshas Vayakhel, the Torah lists them together.

So why is the incense altar mentioned here, after the Mishkan, its vessels, and the sacrifices of the inauguration?

Ramban explains that this placement is intentional. At the end of the previous section, the Torah states:

“וְנִקְדַּשׁ בִּכְבוֹדִי” — “It shall be sanctified by My glory,”
“וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל” — “I will dwell among the children of Israel.”

After declaring the dwelling of the Shechinah among Israel, the Torah adds that they must also build an altar for incense, to burn incense for the honor of Hashem.

Ramban then reveals a deeper teaching: a secret was given to Moshe that the incense has the power to halt a plague, as taught in the Talmud (Shabbos 89a). The incense is associated with the attribute of Divine judgment, as implied in the verse:

“יָשִׂימוּ קְטוֹרָה בְּאַפֶּךָ” (דברים ל״ג:י׳),

where the word “אַפֶּךָ” is connected to the expression:

“וְחָרָה אַפִּי” — “My wrath shall burn.”

For this reason, when Nadav and Avihu offered “strange incense,” the Torah says:

“וְעַל פְּנֵי כָל הָעָם אֶכָּבֵד” (ויקרא י׳:ג׳),

meaning that the people would recognize Hashem’s glory and realize that He does not overlook transgression. The incense, therefore, is bound up with the attribute of strict justice.

This also explains the Torah’s lengthy description of the altar’s placement:

“וְנָתַתָּ אֹתוֹ לִפְנֵי הַפָּרֹכֶת… לִפְנֵי הַכַּפֹּרֶת… אֲשֶׁר אִוָּעֵד לְךָ שָׁמָּה.”

Why such detailed language, instead of the simpler expression used elsewhere: “before the Ark of the Testimony in the Tent of Meeting”?

Ramban explains that this elaboration is meant to emphasize the altar’s inner spiritual function and its connection to the place of Divine meeting and revelation.

30:7 — “וְהִקְטִיר עָלָיו אַהֲרֹן קְטֹרֶת סַמִּים”
“And Aaron shall burn upon it incense of spices.”

Ramban explains that this commandment was not limited to the Kohen Gadol. Like the lighting of the lamps, which is mentioned alongside it, the service could also be performed by ordinary priests.

Although the verse mentions Aharon, this does not restrict the mitzvah to him alone. After all, regarding the menorah, the Torah also says:

“Aaron shall arrange it,”

yet elsewhere it states:

“Aaron and his sons shall arrange it,”

showing that the service applied to all priests.

Ramban is uncertain why the Torah mentions Aharon specifically in both the incense and the lamps. He suggests two possibilities:

It anticipates the later verse:
“וְכִפֶּר אַהֲרֹן עַל קַרְנֹתָיו” (30:10),
which refers to the Yom Kippur service performed only by the Kohen Gadol.

Or it hints that Aharon was the one who first began the service of burning the incense and lighting the lamps.

Similarly, in Parshas Emor, the Torah states:

“Aaron shall arrange it,”

without mentioning his sons, because he was the one who initiated the service.

30:9 — “קְטֹרֶת זָרָה לֹא תַעֲלוּ עָלָיו”
“You shall not offer strange incense upon it.”

Rashi explains that “strange incense” refers to any incense brought as a voluntary offering, since all incense is considered “strange” to this altar except the prescribed one.

However, Ramban cites the translation of Onkelos:

“קְטֹרֶת בֻּסְמִין נֻכְרָאִין”
— incense made from foreign or different ingredients.

Onkelos does not translate it as “strange incense” in a general sense, but as incense composed of unfamiliar or unauthorized components.

According to this explanation, the verse prohibits offering incense made from any ingredients other than the precise formula commanded by the Torah. Even adding extra spices to the prescribed composition would violate this prohibition.

Chapter 30 Summary

In this chapter, Ramban turns to the altar of incense and the daily service performed upon it. He explains why the Torah mentions this altar only after the description of the Mishkan’s vessels and the inauguration of the priests: it represents the honor of the Shechinah dwelling among Israel. Ramban reveals the deeper secret that the incense is bound to the attribute of Divine judgment and possesses the power to halt plagues. He clarifies that the daily incense service applied to all priests, not only the Kohen Gadol, and explains the prohibition of “strange incense” as forbidding any alteration to the precise formula commanded by the Torah. Through this, Ramban portrays the incense as a mysterious and powerful service, standing at the threshold of the Divine Presence and expressing both judgment and reconciliation.

Summary of Ramban on Parshas Tetzaveh

Across Parshas Tetzaveh, Ramban presents the kehunah as a sacred system of elevation—of garments, service, offerings, and Divine encounter. The priestly garments reflect royal dignity and heavenly glory; the Urim ve’Tumim reveal hidden judgment; the inauguration offerings perfect and consecrate the priests; and the incense altar stands as a symbol of the Shechinah’s presence among Israel. Through precise textual analysis and deep spiritual insight, Ramban shows that the Mishkan was not only a physical sanctuary, but the earthly dwelling of the Divine Presence, where Israel’s service reveals the glory of Hashem in the world.

📖 Source

• Ramban on Tetzaveh: 27:20-30:9

Sforno on Parshas Tetzaveh – Commentary

Introduction to Sforno on Parshas Tetzaveh

Sforno’s commentary on Parshas Tetzaveh reveals the inner purpose of the Mishkan’s service and the garments of the Kohanim. Rather than viewing these details as merely technical or ceremonial, Sforno consistently emphasizes their spiritual function: to draw Divine favor, inspire awe, and establish a direct relationship between Hashem and the people of Israel.

Throughout the parsha, he highlights the role of intention—whether in providing oil for the Menorah, crafting the priestly garments, or offering the inauguration sacrifices. Each action is meant to elevate the people’s consciousness and connect them to the Divine presence dwelling among them. The Kohen Gadol, bearing the names of the tribes on his heart and shoulders, becomes the living symbol of this bond, praying for the people and carrying their merit before Hashem.

Shemos 27:20 — שמות כ״ז:כ׳ — וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה

Sforno explains that the phrase “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה” marks a change from earlier commands that began with “וְעָשִׂיתָ.” Previously, Moshe was instructed to have the work done through others, delegating the tasks to craftsmen. Here, however, the Torah emphasizes “and you personally,” indicating that Moshe himself must take direct responsibility. He is to instruct Israel regarding the oil for the Menorah, assemble Aharon and his sons, and address the wise-hearted artisans.

The command “וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ” teaches that the oil must be supplied continually. The people should not assume that the initial donation of oil during the Mishkan’s construction was a one-time obligation. Rather, the commandment of lighting the Menorah requires ongoing provision as the supply is depleted.

Shemos 28:2 — שמות כ״ח:ב׳ — לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאָרֶת

The priestly garments are described as being made “לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאָרֶת.”
Sforno explains:

• “לְכָבוֹד” — to bring honor and glory to the Almighty through the sacred garments worn during Divine service.
• “וּלְתִפְאָרֶת” — to inspire awe among the people. The Kohen carries the names of the tribes engraved on his garments, signifying that the nation is bound to his heart and shoulders.

Shemos 28:3 — שמות כ״ח:ג׳ — וְאַתָּה תְּדַבֵּר

Moshe is commanded to speak to the wise-hearted artisans so they carry out all the previously stated instructions.

They are to fashion the priestly garments not merely as clothing, but specifically for the purpose of consecration—with the intention of sanctifying Aharon for Divine service.

Shemos 28:5 — שמות כ״ח:ה׳ — וְהֵם יִקְחוּ אֶת הַזָּהָב

The artisans must approach their work with proper intention not only during the actual crafting, but even while receiving the materials. The sanctity of the task requires focused awareness from the moment the contributions are accepted.

Shemos 28:6–7 — שמות כ״ח:ו׳–ז׳ — אֵפוֹד… שְׁתֵּי כְתֵפוֹת חֹבְרֹת

Sforno describes the ephod as a garment covering the body from the waist downward, with an upper sash used to gird it over the tunic.

The shoulder pieces were carefully matched and joined with precision to the body of the ephod, forming a unified garment.

Shemos 28:12 — שמות כ״ח:י״ב — עַל שְׁתֵּי כְתֵפָיו לְזִכָּרוֹן

The stones on the shoulders serve “לְזִכָּרוֹן”—to invoke Divine mercy upon Israel through the merit symbolized by the priest wearing them.

Shemos 28:14 — שמות כ״ח:י״ד — מִגְבָּלוֹת

The chains connecting the ephod and breastplate were constructed with exact measurements so they would stretch precisely from the shoulder pieces to the breastplate.

Shemos 28:21 — שמות כ״ח:כ״א — וְהָאֲבָנִים תִּהְיֶיןָ

The gemstones engraved with the tribal names became sacred once dedicated for that purpose.

The Torah emphasizes the number twelve—no more and no fewer—corresponding exactly to the twelve tribes.

Each stone was engraved with intention for the specific tribe it represented; neither the stone nor the intention could be interchanged.

Shemos 28:22 — שמות כ״ח:כ״ב — גַּבְלֻת

The connecting chains were not adjustable, but designed to span a fixed, precise distance between the shoulder piece and the breastplate.

Shemos 28:27 — שמות כ״ח:כ״ז — מִמּוּל פָּנָיו

The positioning of the rings is clarified: they were to be placed below the face level, aligned with the ephod’s sash, rather than at the level of the shoulders.

Shemos 28:29 — שמות כ״ח:כ״ט — לְזִכָּרוֹן לִפְנֵי ה׳ תָּמִיד

The breastplate serves as a constant remembrance before Hashem, so that He recalls the merit of the tribal fathers and treats their descendants with favor.

Shemos 28:30 — שמות כ״ח:ל׳ — מִשְׁפַּט בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עַל לִבּוֹ

The Kohen Gadol carries “משפט בני ישראל על לבו”—the judgment of Israel upon his heart—so that he prays for them to be vindicated in their judgments.

Shemos 28:32 — שמות כ״ח:ל״ב — לֹא יִקָּרֵעַ

The robe’s neckline was to be round, not a vertical slit. The expression “לא יקרע” refers to preventing a long, open tear; instead, the opening must be circular like a ring.

Shemos 28:41 — שמות כ״ח:מ״א — וּמִלֵּאתָ אֶת יָדָם

The phrase “ומלאת את ידם” means to complete their preparation fully, ensuring that the priests are properly equipped and ready to perform the sacred service.

Shemos 29:22 — שמות כ״ט:כ״ב — כִּי אֵיל מִלֻּאִים הוּא

The right thigh of the inauguration ram was burned on the altar because it symbolically corresponds to the priest’s right hand—the hand with which the sacred service is performed.

Shemos 29:24 — שמות כ״ט:כ״ד — וְהֵנַפְתָּ

The waving of the sacrificial portions teaches that the priests eat from “the table of Heaven,” receiving their portions as a Divine gift rather than as a personal entitlement.

Shemos 29:29 — שמות כ״ט:כ״ט — וּלְמַלֵּא בָם אֶת יָדָם

The inauguration procedures were necessary only for Aharon and his sons. Later generations, born into the priesthood, did not require this consecration.

Shemos 29:45 — שמות כ״ט:מ״ה — וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל

Hashem promises to dwell among Israel, accept their service favorably, and listen to their prayers.

He will guide their affairs directly, without intermediaries, elevating them above the influence of the stars and ensuring their eternal existence.

Shemos 30:1 — שמות ל׳:א׳ — מִזְבֵּחַ מִקְטַר קְטֹרֶת

Sforno explains that the golden incense altar required only a small fire, unlike the outer altar, which needed to be filled with earth.

He notes that this altar was not mentioned earlier because its purpose differed from the other vessels:

• The other furnishings served to bring the Divine Presence into the Mishkan.
• The incense altar was meant to honor Hashem after He accepted Israel’s offerings, expressing reverence and welcome through the fragrance of the incense.

Shemos 30:4 — שמות ל׳:ד׳ — שְׁתֵּי צַלְעֹתָיו

The phrase “שתי צלעותיו” refers to the upper corners of the altar, while “שני צדיו” refers to its side walls.

Summary of Sforno on Parshas Tetzaveh

Sforno presents the Mishkan not only as a physical structure, but as a system designed to cultivate a direct and favorable relationship between Hashem and Israel. The priestly garments bring honor to the Divine service and inspire reverence among the people, while the stones and breastplate symbolize constant remembrance and intercession. The inauguration offerings teach humility, reminding the Kohanim that their portion comes from the “table of Heaven.”

The parsha culminates with the promise that Hashem will dwell among Israel, guide them without intermediaries, and listen to their prayers. Even the incense altar, though not essential to bringing the Divine presence, serves to honor Hashem after He accepts the people’s offerings. Through these themes, Sforno portrays the Mishkan as a place of closeness, prayer, and Divine favor—where sacred action and proper intention bring the nation into a direct relationship with its Creator.

📖 Source

• Sforno on Tetzaveh: 27:20-30:4

Abarbanel on Parshas Tetzaveh – Commentary

Introduction to Abarbanel on Parshas Tetzaveh

Abarbanel’s commentary on Parshas Tetzaveh is structured around a series of large conceptual questions concerning the priesthood, the garments, the inauguration offerings, and the daily service of the Mishkan. He seeks to explain not only the technical details of the commands, but their philosophical meaning and their place within the broader structure of the Torah. Throughout this section, Abarbanel moves in a consistent pattern: first establishing the peshat of each passage, then presenting alternative symbolic systems—whether philosophical, midrashic, or ethical—and finally offering his own integrative understanding. In doing so, he portrays the priesthood and its service not merely as ritual institutions, but as models of spiritual order, national atonement, gratitude, and human perfection.

Chapter 27

27:20 — וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל…

“And you shall command the Children of Israel…”

Abarbanel opens this section by raising a series of structural and conceptual questions about the placement, wording, and details of this passage.

The Questions

1. Why did Hashem command here about arranging the lamps? This command seems out of place, for it would have been more appropriate only after the Mishkan, the menorah, and all the vessels had already been made and placed in position, and after the priesthood had been granted to Aharon and his sons. How could they be commanded about the service of lighting the lamps before their priesthood was established?
2. Why does the verse say, “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה” (“And you shall command”)? It should have said, “Command Aharon” or “Command the Children of Israel,” as it says later in Parshas Emor regarding this very mitzvah. Ramban explains that “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה” emphasizes that Moshe himself must issue the command and not through a messenger, but if so, it should have said “וְאַתָּה צַו” (“And you command”), just as it says “וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב” (“And you bring near”).
3. This very passage is repeated later in Parshas Emor with almost no change. Here it says “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה” without the introductory phrase “And Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying,” whereas there it says:
   וַיְדַבֵּר ה׳ אֶל־מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר. צַו אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל…
   That later location is the appropriate place and time for the command. Why then is it stated here seemingly without need?
4. After this, the verse says:
   וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ אֶת־אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ…
   This should have been the opening of the section: first to separate Aharon and his sons for the priesthood, and only afterward to command them regarding lighting the lamps. Rashi comments that this refers to after the Mishkan is completed, but he does not explain why the command appears here out of order.
5. The verse says:
   וְאַתָּה תְּדַבֵּר אֶל־כָּל־חַכְמֵי־לֵב…
   Why was there a need to mention the craftsmen here before the command of the priestly garments? This was not stated regarding the Aron, the Keruvim, the table, or the menorah. It is obvious that the craftsmen would take what was needed. In Parshas Ki Sisa, the craftsmen are commanded explicitly. Why mention them here?
6. In listing the garments, it mentions:
   חֹשֶׁן, אֵפוֹד, מְעִיל, כְּתֹנֶת תַּשְׁבֵּץ, מִצְנֶפֶת, אַבְנֵט
   But it does not mention the ציץ (the golden forehead plate), nor the trousers. Only later are the trousers mentioned regarding the sons of Aharon. Why are they not mentioned here? And why are the mitznefes and avnet not mentioned later in their making?
7. Regarding the Urim and Tumim, the verse says:
   וְנָתַתָּ אֶל־חֹשֶׁן הַמִּשְׁפָּט אֶת־הָאוּרִים וְאֶת־הַתֻּמִּים
   The goldwork, settings, and stones were made by craftsmen. But the Urim and Tumim themselves are never described as being made. There is no command “and you shall make,” nor is there a description that they were made. Yet Moshe is told to place them into the breastplate. What were they? And why are they mentioned with the definite article—“the Urim and the Tumim”—when they were not previously described?
8. If the level of the Urim and Tumim was lower than prophecy, being a form of Ruach HaKodesh, how could it sometimes surpass prophecy? Chazal say that prophetic promises may depend on the merit of recipients, but the Urim and Tumim never give an answer that fails. A prophet cannot prophesy whenever he wishes, but the Kohen could inquire through the Urim and Tumim at will. If this level is greater than prophecy, how could every Kohen Gadol—great or small—merit it?
9. What is the reason for the sacrifices commanded during the days of the inauguration: a bull, two rams, and unleavened bread? Why was the bull a sin offering burned outside the camp, one ram a burnt offering entirely consumed on the altar, and the second ram not a burnt offering but the ram of inauguration, from which Moshe, Aharon, and his sons ate?
10. Why were the two rams different from each other? One was entirely burnt on the altar, while the second was eaten. The blood of the first was thrown around the altar. But from the blood of the second, some was placed on the ear, thumb, and toe of Aharon and his sons. Also, from its blood and the anointing oil, Moshe sprinkled their garments. The second ram is called “אֵיל הַמִּלֻּאִים,” but the first is not. What is the reason for all these differences?
11. Why is Aharon anointed twice? First, it says:
    וְלָקַחְתָּ אֶת־שֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה וְיָצַקְתָּ עַל־רֹאשׁוֹ וּמָשַׁחְתָּ אֹתוֹ
    Then later, regarding the second ram, it says that Moshe took some of the blood and the anointing oil and sprinkled it upon Aharon, his garments, and his sons. Why were there two anointings?
12. Of all the sacrifices that Israel would offer on the altar, why are only the daily offerings mentioned here in the passage beginning:
    וְזֶה אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ
    None of the other offerings mentioned later in Vayikra, Emor, or Pinchas are mentioned here. Why is only the tamid recorded here, and not in its proper place?

Abarbanel’s Explanation

Abarbanel explains that the Torah here is not primarily commanding the oil for the menorah or the lighting itself. Rather, the true purpose of this passage is to introduce the priestly garments.

The structure of the verses shows that the lighting command is only mentioned in order to explain why Aharon and his sons must be separated and dressed in special garments.

The meaning of the passage is as follows:

• “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה” — You will in the future command the Children of Israel to bring pure olive oil.
• In the Ohel Moed, outside the curtain, Aharon and his sons will arrange the lamps from evening to morning.
• This is an eternal statute.
• Since only the priests may perform this service, it is necessary to bring Aharon and his sons near and appoint them to the priesthood.
• They cannot enter in ordinary garments; they must wear holy vestments.
• Therefore, the Torah proceeds immediately to the command of the priestly garments.

Thus, the lighting command appears here not for its own sake, but to explain the necessity of the priesthood and their garments.

This resolves the first two questions.

On the Phrase “וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה”

The lighting command here is not the formal mitzvah itself. That appears later in its proper place in Parshas Emor, where it says:

צַו אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זָךְ…

There the command stands on its own. Here it appears only as background information, explaining why the priests must be appointed and clothed. Therefore, it is phrased:

וְאַתָּה תְּצַוֶּה
“And you will command,”

as if to say: because you will command this service, therefore Aharon and his sons must be prepared for it.

This resolves the third question.

On the Nature of the Oil

The Torah says:

שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זָךְ כָּתִית לַמָּאוֹר

This teaches:

• Only olive oil may be used.
• Not oil from nuts, sesame, fish, or other sources.
• It must be pure and clear, without sediment.
• It must be produced by pounding (כתית), the first drop of oil from the crushed olive.

This oil burns with a steady, clear flame, bringing light that gladdens and sharpens the mind. Inferior oil, mixed with sediment, produces a weak flame.

Because this pure oil was rare and costly, it was initially donated by the princes. Later, in the Land of Israel, it was purchased from the Temple treasury, as taught by Chazal.

Ibn Ezra, however, explains that “זך כתית” refers to the olive itself—that it must be pure and not rotten, and then crushed. But Abarbanel understands it to refer to the oil’s purity.

On the Meaning of “נֵר תָּמִיד”

Rashi explains that “נר תמיד” means that every night the lamps are lit.

But Chazal interpret it as referring to the western lamp, which burned continually without extinguishing. Ramban agrees with this interpretation, and Abarbanel accepts it as correct.

On the Location of the Menorah

The verse says:

בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד מִחוּץ לַפָּרֹכֶת אֲשֶׁר עַל־הָעֵדוּת

This teaches:

• The light was needed for those entering the Heichal.
• For Moshe when he entered to receive prophecy.
• For Aharon when he entered to burn incense, arrange the lamps, set the showbread, or enter on Yom Kippur.

The light was not needed for the Shechinah. Therefore, it was placed outside the curtain, not inside.

It also ensured that the Kohen lighting the lamps would not see the Keruvim directly.

On “וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ”

The verse says:

וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ

This teaches that the light was for Moshe’s benefit, for he entered the sanctuary frequently. It was not for Hashem’s sake, for He has no need of light.

On the Role of Aharon

The verse says:

יַעֲרֹךְ אֹתוֹ אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו

This means:

• Aharon would calculate how much oil was needed from evening to morning.
• Chazal taught that half a log per lamp sufficed for the longest nights.
• It also implies arranging the lamps so their flames would burn properly.

The mitzvah ideally belonged to the Kohen Gadol, though it could later be performed by other priests.

Summary of Abarbanel’s Main Thesis for 27:20

The lighting command appears here:

• Not as an independent mitzvah
• But as the reason for the priesthood and their garments

The flow of the section is:

1. The priests must light the menorah.
2. Therefore they must be appointed.
3. Therefore they must wear special garments.

The command about the oil thus serves as the introduction to the entire priestly section.

Chapter 28

28:1 — וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ אֶת־אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ…

“And you shall bring near to yourself Aharon your brother…”

Abarbanel explains this passage as a continuation of the structure he established earlier: the command regarding the oil and lighting was not the primary subject, but rather the introduction to the appointment of the priesthood and the making of the priestly garments.

The Meaning of “וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ”

According to the approach of Ibn Ezra, this command is part of the broader instruction Hashem told Moshe:

אֲשֶׁר אֲצַוֶּה אוֹתְךָ אֶל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
“that I will command you to the Children of Israel.”

Meaning:

• After commanding about the oil for the lamps,
• Moshe would also be commanded to separate Aharon and his sons
• From among the Children of Israel,
• To serve in the Mikdash,
• They and their descendants forever,
• Not the firstborn and not any other outsider.

According to Abarbanel’s own approach, this verse gives the reason why the lighting of the lamps was assigned specifically to Aharon and his sons.

The Torah is saying:

• Because Aharon is the one closest to Moshe in spiritual perfection and prophecy,
• Therefore he is the most fitting to enter the Mikdash and perform its sacred service.

At the Revelation, it says:

וְעָלִיתָ אַתָּה וְאַהֲרֹן עִמָּךְ…
“You and Aharon shall ascend…” (שמות י״ט)

No one else was brought as close as Aharon. Since he was the closest in prophetic stature and spiritual refinement, the priesthood was given to him.

Thus the Torah says:

וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ אֶת־אַהֲרֹן… לְכַהֲנוֹ־לִי
“You shall bring near Aharon… to serve as a priest to Me.”

This was to inform all Israel that Aharon and his sons were chosen for the service of the Mikdash.

Why the People Accepted Aharon’s Appointment

No one among Israel objected to this appointment.

For if Moshe had acted on his own initiative, he would have granted this greatness to his own sons—Gershom and Eliezer—rather than to the sons of his brother Aharon.

But since Moshe, the master of the prophets, followed only Hashem’s command, he gave the priesthood to Aharon and his descendants, just as later he gave leadership to Yehoshua his servant.

This demonstrated that the appointment came from Hashem, not from personal preference.

Why the Verse Clarifies “לְכַהֲנוֹ לִי”

Earlier, the Torah said:

יַעֲרֹךְ אֹתוֹ אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו
“Aharon and his sons shall arrange it.”

But from that alone, it would not be clear:

• Whether this was a temporary arrangement,
• Or a permanent institution,
• And whether it applied to all Temple services.

Therefore, the Torah clarifies:

לְכַהֲנוֹ לִי
“To serve as priests to Me.”

This establishes:

• That Aharon and his descendants are designated
• For all services of the Mikdash
• Permanently.

Chazal note that the phrase “לְכַהֲנוֹ לִי” appears three times in the section, each with an extra letter ו, hinting to the eighteen Kohanim Gedolim who served during the First Beis HaMikdash.

Why the Priesthood Was Given to One Family

Hashem chose that the service of the Mikdash would be performed by one family, and no outsider would enter among them. This was for two reasons.

First Reason: Spiritual Preparation

Those who serve Hashem must:

• Attain wisdom
• Know the knowledge of the Most High

But many obstacles prevent such attainment:

• Pursuit of livelihood
• Responsibilities toward wife and children
• Material concerns

Therefore:

• One family was set aside for this task.
• Their entire effort would be devoted to divine knowledge and service.
• They would not be burdened with worldly acquisition like the rest of Israel.

This could not have been accomplished across the entire nation. Therefore:

• A single family was separated,
• The most spiritually fit family:
  
  • The sons of Aharon,
  • From both the paternal and maternal sides.

They were given the gifts of the priesthood so they could live from them and serve the Mikdash on behalf of the entire nation.

The rest of Israel would engage in their own work.

Hashem chose the tribe of Levi from among all tribes because it was the most prepared for spiritual perfection, and from it came Aharon and his sons, who were the most perfected of that tribe.

He did not choose Moshe’s sons:

• Because their maternal lineage was Midianite,
• Whereas Aharon’s sons were complete in lineage from both sides.

This is why the Torah records their genealogy.

Second Reason: To Reflect Divine Unity

Hashem also chose one priestly family to reflect the principle of Divine unity.

Just as:

• Israel is one nation,
• The place Hashem chooses is one,
• The Torah is one,

So too:

• The servants of the Mikdash come from one family.

All of this reflects the unity of Hashem.

Why the Sons of Aharon Are Named

The verse lists:

נָדָב, וַאֲבִיהוּא, אֶלְעָזָר, וְאִיתָמָר

This teaches:

• They were chosen not only because of their father,
• But also because of their own personal perfection.

It is unlikely that Aharon had other sons who were not chosen, since Hashem chose the entire house of Aharon.

Ramban writes that Pinchas and others born later were not initially consecrated, but only these four sons who were anointed with him. Abarbanel notes that Ramban derived this from the verse about Pinchas:

וְהָיְתָה לוֹ וּלְזַרְעוֹ אַחֲרָיו בְּרִית כְּהֻנַּת עוֹלָם
“and it shall be for him and his descendants after him a covenant of eternal priesthood” (במדבר כ״ה).

Abarbanel states that when he reaches that passage, he will demonstrate that this is not correct.

The Purpose of the Priestly Garments

Hashem commanded:

וְעָשִׂיתָ בִגְדֵי־קֹדֶשׁ… לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאָרֶת
“You shall make holy garments… for honor and for beauty.”

This means:

• In their inner essence, they are holy garments.
• In their outward appearance, they are garments of honor and splendor.

Through them, the people would recognize the priests as elevated and dignified.

Ramban explains how these garments express honor and beauty, drawing on verses such as:

כִּי תִפְאֶרֶת עֻזּוֹ אַתָּה
“You are the glory of his strength”

and:

בֵּית קָדְשֵׁנוּ וְתִפְאַרְתֵּנוּ
“Our holy and glorious house.”

Thus the status of Aharon is clarified, and the earlier question is resolved.

Why Moshe Is Told to Speak to the Wise-Hearted

The verse says:

וְאַתָּה תְּדַבֵּר אֶל־כָּל־חַכְמֵי־לֵב…

Hashem wanted the garments made in such a way that no one would suspect Moshe of enriching his brother Aharon through the use of gold, techeiles, argaman, tola’as shani, and fine linen.

Therefore:

• Moshe was told not to take the materials himself.
• Instead, he should instruct the wise-hearted artisans,
• Those filled with a spirit of wisdom,
• And they would make the garments.

This prevented suspicion and ensured transparency.

The phrase:

אֲשֶׁר מִלֵּאתִיו רוּחַ חָכְמָה
“whom I have filled with a spirit of wisdom”

refers to the heart—Hashem filled their hearts with wisdom.

Why the Artisans Must Be Wise-Hearted

The garments required both:

• Holiness
• Honor and beauty

The garments themselves conferred holiness:

• One who wore them was sanctified.
• One who did not wear them was not.

As it says:

הָסִירוּ הַבְּגָדִים הַצֹּאִים מֵעָלָיו
“Remove the filthy garments from him” (זכריה ג׳)

Ordinary garments are called “filthy,” while priestly garments are holy.

Therefore:

• The artisans had to be wise-hearted.
• They would determine the proper amounts of gold, techeiles, and other materials.

The verse says:

וְהֵם יִקְחוּ אֶת־הַזָּהָב…
“They shall take the gold…”

Meaning:

• They themselves would collect the materials
• From the public or the treasurers
• And make the garments

So that Moshe would not be suspected.

This resolves the fifth question.

Why Only Six Garments Are Listed

The Torah lists six garments and does not mention:

• The ציץ (forehead plate)
• The trousers

This is because the verse is only listing garments that require great wisdom and craftsmanship, as it says:

וְאַתָּה תְּדַבֵּר אֶל־כָּל־חַכְמֵי־לֵב

Thus:

• The choshen, ephod, and me’il clearly required craftsmanship.
• The ketones also required skill because it was woven in a patterned design (תשבץ).

The mitznefes includes the tzitz:

• The tzitz was placed upon it.
• Therefore, when the mitznefes is mentioned, the tzitz is implied.

As for the trousers:

• They required no special craftsmanship.
• Aharon and his sons already wore such garments to cover nakedness.
• Therefore, there was no need to command the wise-hearted artisans about them.

Why the Garments Are Listed Out of Order

The garments are not listed in the order they are worn, but according to their importance:

1. Choshen — the most exalted
2. Ephod — which carries the choshen
3. Me’il — which carries the ephod
4. Ketones — worn beneath the me’il
5. Mitznefes — worn on the head, with the tzitz
6. Avnet — the least important, the belt around the ketones

Meaning of “לְאַהֲרֹן… וּלְבָנָיו”

The verse says:

וְעָשׂוּ בִגְדֵי־קֹדֶשׁ לְאַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ וּלְבָנָיו

This does not mean that Aharon’s sons wore the same garments as the Kohen Gadol.

Rather:

• After Aharon’s death,
• Whichever son became Kohen Gadol
• Would wear those special garments.

Some explain that this refers to the four garments of the ordinary priests, but Abarbanel rejects this:

• The ordinary priest’s ketones was not woven like the patterned one mentioned here.
• Their headgear was not a mitznefes but a simpler cap.

Thus, the passage refers specifically to the garments of the Kohen Gadol, to be worn by Aharon and later by his successors.

This resolves the sixth question.

Exodus 28:6 — וְעָשׂוּ אֶת־הָאֵפֹד זָהָב תְּכֵלֶת וְאַרְגָּמָן תּוֹלַעַת שָׁנִי וְשֵׁשׁ מָשְׁזָר מַעֲשֵׂה חֹשֵׁב

“And they shall make the ephod of gold, turquoise, purple, scarlet wool, and fine twisted linen, the work of a master weaver.”

Abarbanel explains 28:6 in 4 parts:

• Part I — Peshat explanation of all priestly garments
• Part II — Ibn Ezra / Ralbag cosmological symbolism + rejection
• Part III — Chazal: ethical symbolism of garments
• Part IV — Second symbolic system: body and Temple-service correspondence

Part I — Peshat explanation of all priestly garments

Abarbanel opens 28:6 by declaring that he will first explain the priestly garments according to their plain meaning—how they were physically made and structured—before turning to deeper symbolic interpretations.

He therefore begins with a systematic, technical explanation of the garments of the Kohen Gadol.

The ephod, he explains, was constructed from threads of gold, techeiles, argaman, tola’as shani, and fine linen. There were twenty-four textile threads: six of techeiles, six of argaman, six of scarlet, and six of linen. In addition, gold threads were interwoven with them, so that each type of colored thread was combined with gold. The result was a total of twenty-eight threads—twenty-four of textile and four of gold. Because of this blending, the ephod was woven in a “ma’aseh choshav,” a masterwork pattern visible on both sides, created through weaving rather than stitching.

He continues by outlining the principal components and functions of the garments.

The ephod itself served as the central garment, onto which the choshen was attached. The shoulder stones carried the names of the tribes, representing the nation before Hashem. The choshen, worn upon the heart, contained the Urim v’Tumim, through which prophetic guidance was received.

The me’il, worn beneath the ephod, covered the body and had golden bells and pomegranates on its hem. The sound of the bells announced the Kohen Gadol’s entrance into the Sanctuary, reflecting the dignity and order of the avodah.

The tzitz was worn upon the forehead as a crown of holiness, and the remaining garments—the tunic, belt, turban, and trousers—completed the vestments of sanctity and modesty required for the service.

Abarbanel stresses that the Torah’s laws regarding the garments applied not only to Aharon himself but to all future Kohanim Gedolim and ordinary Kohanim. Therefore, the verse concludes with the phrase “חֻקַּת עוֹלָם לוֹ וּלְזַרְעוֹ אַחֲרָיו,” indicating that these garments and their requirements were an eternal statute for all generations of the priesthood.

He then closes the peshat section explicitly:

“Thus you have the explanation of the priestly garments according to their plain meaning.”

Summary of the peshat structure of the garments:

• The ephod: woven from gold and four colored threads, forming a masterwork garment.
• Shoulder stones: bearing the names of the tribes.
• The choshen: attached to the ephod, worn over the heart, containing the Urim v’Tumim.
• The me’il: robe with bells and pomegranates, signifying entry into the Sanctuary.
• The tzitz: crown upon the forehead.
• Additional garments: tunic, belt, turban, and trousers for dignity, modesty, and sanctity.
• All vestments form an eternal statute for the Kohanim in every generation.

This completes Abarbanel’s first layer: the technical, physical, and functional description of the priestly garments before he turns to their symbolic and philosophical meanings.

Part II — Ibn Ezra’s Cosmological Symbolism and Abarbanel’s Critique

After completing the plain explanation of the priestly garments, Abarbanel turns to the symbolic approach of Ibn Ezra. He introduces this as a philosophical reading rooted in the science of the heavenly bodies.

According to Ibn Ezra, the garments of the Kohen Gadol symbolize the structure and motion of the cosmos.

In this interpretation:

• The ephod represents the movement of the heavenly host in their intermediate motion, the system used by astronomers to calculate celestial movement.
• The astronomical process involves first calculating a mean motion and then adjusting it to match observable reality.
• This layered calculation becomes a symbolic analogy for the structure of the ephod and its components.

The choshen, in this system, corresponds to the zodiacal structure, representing the celestial constellations through which the heavenly bodies move. The Urim v’Tumim represent the higher forms of knowledge that emerge from the celestial order.

According to this approach, the entire system of priestly garments reflects the structure of the universe, with the Kohen Gadol serving as a living symbol of cosmic harmony.

Abarbanel, however, does not accept this explanation as the proper understanding of the Torah’s intent. He presents the view respectfully, but he treats it as an external philosophical interpretation rather than the true meaning of the garments.

He explains that this astronomical symbolism comes from the discipline of the astrologers and reflects their intellectual system rather than the authentic tradition of Torah interpretation. The symbolism may be intellectually elegant, but it is not rooted in the Torah’s own framework or the teachings of Chazal.

He therefore rejects the Ibn Ezra’s cosmological model and prepares to present a different approach—one grounded in Torah thought and the teachings of the sages.

This concludes Abarbanel’s discussion of the astronomical symbolism attributed to Ibn Ezra and sets the stage for the next symbolic interpretation.

Part III — Chazal’s Ethical–Atonement Symbolism of the Priestly Garments

Abarbanel now turns from the cosmological interpretation of Ibn Ezra to the approach of Chazal. He explains that the sages did not interpret the priestly garments as symbols of the heavenly spheres, but rather as instruments of moral repair and atonement within the nation of Israel.

According to this view, each garment of the Kohen Gadol corresponds to a particular sin or moral failing, and its presence in the Temple service serves as a means of spiritual correction for the people.

Chazal taught that the garments atoned for specific transgressions:

• The choshen atoned for errors in judgment.
• The ephod atoned for idolatry.
• The me’il atoned for evil speech.
• The ketones atoned for bloodshed.
• The mitznefes atoned for arrogance.
• The avnet atoned for improper thoughts of the heart.
• The tzitz atoned for brazenness.
• The trousers atoned for sexual immorality.

In this system, the garments are not merely ceremonial clothing. They are instruments of moral purification for the entire nation. The Kohen Gadol, wearing them, represents the spiritual condition of Israel, and the garments themselves symbolize the correction of the nation’s moral failings.

Abarbanel explains that this approach reflects a fundamentally different understanding than the cosmological model. Rather than viewing the Temple service as a reflection of the structure of the heavens, Chazal understood it as a system of ethical refinement and national atonement.

In this reading:

• The priest does not represent the cosmos.
• He represents the people.
• His garments express the moral struggles of the nation.
• Their presence in the service serves as a means of atonement.

Thus, the priestly garments become tools for repairing specific sins and elevating the spiritual state of Israel.

Abarbanel presents this view with respect, recognizing its roots in the teachings of the sages. However, he does not stop here. He explains that there is yet another, deeper symbolic system through which the garments may be understood—one that connects them to the structure of the human being and the spiritual dynamics of the Temple service.

This leads into his final interpretive framework.

Part IV — The Second Symbolic System: The Garments and the Human Body

After presenting the interpretation of Chazal, Abarbanel offers a second, deeper symbolic system. In this approach, the priestly garments are not mapped to sins or to the cosmos, but to the structure of the human body and the inner forces that govern human life.

He explains that the Temple service is meant to elevate the human being. Therefore, the garments of the Kohen Gadol correspond to the principal organs and faculties of the human body. The priest, clothed in these garments, becomes a living model of the perfected human being serving Hashem.

The Three Primary Human Organs

Abarbanel follows a philosophical tradition that identifies three central organs that govern the human being:

1. The brain — seat of intellect and understanding.
2. The heart — seat of emotion, spirit, and life-force.
3. The liver — seat of physical desire and bodily drives.

These three organs represent the hierarchy of the human soul:

• Intellect at the top,
• Emotional and spiritual life in the middle,
• Physical drives at the base.

The garments of the Kohen Gadol correspond to these areas and their functions.

Garments Corresponding to the Head

The mitznefes and the tzitz are worn upon the head.

These symbolize:

• The intellect
• The crown of holiness
• The rule of wisdom over the human being

The tzitz, bearing the inscription “קֹדֶשׁ לַה׳,” represents the sanctification of the mind. It teaches that the intellect must be dedicated to holiness and divine service.

Garments Corresponding to the Heart

The choshen, worn upon the chest over the heart, represents:

• The emotional and spiritual center of the person
• Judgment, discernment, and moral awareness

Since the heart is the seat of inner intention, the choshen—called the “breastplate of judgment”—symbolizes the proper ordering of the emotional and moral life.

Garments Corresponding to the Body and Physical Drives

The lower garments, including:

• The ketones
• The avnet
• The trousers

correspond to the physical and reproductive faculties of the human body.

These garments symbolize:

• Control over physical desires
• Modesty
• Proper channeling of bodily drives

The avnet, which wraps around the body, represents the binding and regulation of physical impulses.

The Me’il and the Full Structure of the Person

The me’il, which covers the entire body, represents the overall structure of human life and action. Its bells and pomegranates symbolize the harmony between:

• Speech
• Action
• Spiritual awareness

The sound of the bells reflects the proper expression of human speech, directed toward holiness.

The Priest as the Model of the Perfected Human

In this system:

• The Kohen Gadol represents the ideal human being.
• His garments reflect the proper ordering of the human faculties.
• The intellect governs the heart.
• The heart governs the body.
• The entire person is directed toward divine service.

Thus, the priestly service becomes a model for the spiritual structure of every individual.

Connection to the Temple Service

Abarbanel further explains that the four principal Temple services correspond to the major functions of the human being:

• Slaughtering
• Receiving the blood
• Bringing it to the altar
• Sprinkling it

These reflect the processes of life, energy, movement, and purification within the human organism.

The Temple is therefore a macrocosm of the human being, and the priest—clothed in these garments—is the living embodiment of the perfected human form.

Summary of the Second Symbolic System

• Head garments: intellect and holiness.
• Choshen over the heart: moral and emotional life.
• Lower garments: control of physical drives.
• Me’il: harmony of speech and action.
• Priest as ideal human being.
• Temple service as reflection of human spiritual processes.

With this, Abarbanel completes his second symbolic interpretation of the priestly garments, concluding his commentary on 28:6.

Chapter 28 Summary

In Chapter 28, Abarbanel explains the appointment of Aharon and his sons to the priesthood and the purpose of the priestly garments. He first clarifies that the priesthood was given specifically to Aharon because of his spiritual closeness to Moshe and his superior readiness for divine service, and that it was entrusted to one family to preserve unity, purity, and spiritual focus. The garments themselves, though outwardly symbols of honor and beauty, were inwardly instruments of sanctity. Abarbanel then develops a layered interpretation of the garments: first describing their physical structure, then presenting and rejecting a cosmological interpretation, followed by the ethical atonement symbolism of Chazal, and finally offering his own philosophical system in which the garments correspond to the faculties of the human body. In this final interpretation, the Kohen Gadol becomes the model of the perfected human being, whose intellect, heart, and physical drives are all harmonized in the service of Hashem.

Chapter 29

29:1 — זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה לָהֶם לְקַדֵּשׁ אֹתָם…

“And this is the matter that you shall do for them to sanctify them…”

Abarbanel explains pshat in 3 parts:

• Part I — Peshat: the actual procedure of the milu’im
• Part II — Golden Calf symbolic system (Torah-based)
• Part III — Human perfection symbolic system (philosophical)

Part I — The Peshat: The Procedure of the Seven Days of Milu’im

After Hashem commanded the separation of Aharon and his sons for the priesthood and described the garments they would wear, He now explains how they would be consecrated and prepared for that sacred service.

Abarbanel explains that a person cannot pass from one state to another—from ordinary status to the exalted level of the priesthood—without a formal act that effects this transformation. Therefore, the seven days of inauguration were necessary both:

• To sanctify Aharon and his sons, and
• To train them in the service of the Mikdash and the sacrificial rites.

For this reason, Moshe himself served as the acting Kohen Gadol during those seven days, performing the service so that Aharon and his sons would learn from him and later carry out the service properly.

This entire procedure was repeated for seven days:

• The first performance sanctified the priests and the altar.
• The remaining days served as training, so that Aharon and his sons would master the laws of the service.

Chazal taught that a Kohen Gadol who does not know the essentials of the service cannot perform valid avodah. Therefore, the Torah required this period of instruction and consecration.

The Required Offerings

The verse commands the following:

• One young bull
• Two rams
• Unleavened bread:
  
  • Plain loaves
  • Oil-mixed cakes
  • Oil-anointed wafers

Abarbanel explains:

• The bull was a young animal, about two years old.
• The ram was older, at least thirteen months.

The three types of bread were made from different consistencies of dough:

• The plain loaves had no oil.
• The cakes were mixed with oil during kneading.
• The wafers were baked first and then anointed with oil while still hot.

According to tradition, each type numbered ten, for a total of thirty loaves. All were to be unleavened and made from fine, sifted flour.

All the breads were placed together into a single basket, since the word “על” can mean “within,” not only “upon.”

Although the cakes and wafers resembled offerings described later in Vayikra, the plain loaves did not, since most meal offerings contained oil. Still, all of these were brought together because their combined presence completed the consecration of Aharon and his sons.

Washing and Dressing the Priests

The offerings were brought to the entrance of the Ohel Moed, meaning the courtyard area, from which one entered the Sanctuary.

Before dressing them in the priestly garments, Moshe first washed Aharon and his sons with water. Abarbanel explains:

• Purification precedes adornment.
• First they were cleansed of physical impurity.
• Only then were they clothed in sacred garments.

Since Aharon was the head, Moshe dressed him first:

1. The tunic
2. The belt
3. The robe of the ephod
4. The ephod
5. The choshen
6. The turban
7. The golden tzitz

The trousers were not mentioned here because they were worn earlier for reasons of modesty.

Anointing Aharon

After dressing Aharon, Moshe anointed him with the anointing oil, pouring it upon his head.

Abarbanel explains:

• The turban wrapped around the head, leaving the crown exposed.
• The oil was poured onto that exposed area.

Chazal taught that the Kohen Gadol was anointed with a small amount of oil in the shape of a Greek letter “כ” on his head. Abarbanel suggests that this symbolized the word “כהן,” indicating that he had been chosen for the priesthood.

Dressing and Consecrating the Sons

After consecrating Aharon, Moshe did the same for his sons:

• He brought them forward.
• Dressed them in their priestly tunics.
• Placed caps upon their heads.

The verse says:

וְהָיְתָה לָהֶם כְּהֻנָּה לְחֻקַּת עוֹלָם
“And the priesthood shall be theirs as an eternal statute.”

This means:

• From this moment onward, the priesthood would belong to them and their descendants forever.
• They would not require this full consecration again.

However:

• The High Priesthood still required anointing.
• Not every son of the Kohen Gadol would become Kohen Gadol.
• Therefore, the one selected would be specially anointed.

The phrase:

וּמִלֵּאתָ יַד־אַהֲרֹן וְיַד־בָּנָיו
“and you shall fill the hand of Aharon and the hand of his sons”

means:

• Through this process, they were empowered and enabled to perform the Temple service.

The Bull: Sin Offering

After the dressing and anointing, the Torah describes the offerings.

The bull was brought before the Tent of Meeting. Abarbanel explains:

• Earlier verses spoke of bringing the animals near.
• Now the bull is brought specifically to the place where Aharon and his sons stood.

They performed semichah (leaning) upon it, with confession and repentance.

Moshe himself slaughtered the bull, since during these days he served as the acting High Priest. The slaughter was done in the northern part of the courtyard, similar to the service of Yom Kippur.

The blood was applied:

• To the four corners of the altar.
• The remainder was poured at its base.

The fats were burned on the altar, but:

• The rest of the bull—its hide, flesh, and waste—
• Was burned outside the camp,
• Like the sin offering of a priest.

The First Ram: Burnt Offering

The first ram was offered as a burnt offering:

• They performed semichah.
• It was slaughtered.
• Its blood was dashed around the altar.
• The ram was entirely burned on the altar.

This represented the standard law of the burnt offering, completely consumed for Hashem.

The Second Ram: The Ram of Inauguration

The second ram was treated differently.

After semichah and slaughter:

• Some of its blood was placed on:
  
  • The right ear of Aharon and his sons
  • The right thumb
  • The right big toe

Abarbanel explains this as symbolic instruction:

• The ear: to listen to Hashem’s teachings.
• The hand: to perform the service.
• The foot: to walk in His commandments.

All were on the right side, the side of perfection.

This ram was called:

אֵיל הַמִּלֻּאִים
“The ram of inauguration”

because it completed their consecration.

Part of its blood was also thrown on the altar, and some was mixed with the anointing oil and sprinkled on:

• Aharon
• His garments
• His sons
• Their garments

This sanctified both the priests and their vestments permanently.

The Wave Offering and Eating the Meat

Certain fats, the right thigh, and portions of the bread were placed on the hands of Aharon and his sons. Moshe placed his hands beneath theirs and waved them before Hashem.

Afterward:

• These portions were burned on the altar.
• The breast of the ram was given to Moshe as his portion.
  Abarbanel on Parshas Tetzaveh 2…

The remaining meat was cooked in a holy place, and Aharon and his sons ate it along with the bread.

No outsider was permitted to eat from it, since it was holy. Any leftovers were burned.

The Seven-Day Repetition and the Altar’s Atonement

This entire process was repeated for seven days.

In addition to the offerings for Aharon and his sons, another bull was offered each day for the altar itself, to purify and consecrate it.

This was necessary because:

• Perhaps some part of the Mishkan or altar had been made with stolen materials.
• The altar therefore required atonement and purification.

Summary of Part I — The Peshat of the Milu’im

• Seven-day consecration process.
• Moshe serves as acting High Priest.
• Priests washed and dressed.
• Aharon anointed.
• Three offerings:
  
  • Bull: sin offering.
  • First ram: burnt offering.
  • Second ram: inauguration peace offering.
• Blood placed on ear, thumb, and toe.
• Garments and priests sanctified.
• Portions waved and burned.
• Remaining meat eaten by Aharon and sons.
• Entire process repeated for seven days.
• Additional daily bull for altar atonement.

Part II — The First Symbolic System: The Milu’im as Atonement for the Golden Calf

After completing the plain explanation of the inauguration offerings, Abarbanel presents a deeper symbolic interpretation, based on the teachings of Chazal, connecting the entire system of the milu’im to the sin of the Golden Calf.

Chazal taught that the bull offered during the inauguration was meant to atone for Aharon’s role in the Golden Calf. Even though the command for these offerings was given before the sin of the calf actually occurred, Hashem already knew what would happen and therefore prepared the means of atonement in advance.

However, Abarbanel notes that while this explains the bull, it does not explain the rest of the offerings:

• Why were there two rams?
• Why was one entirely burned?
• Why was the second treated as a peace offering?
• What was the role of the bread, cakes, and wafers?

He therefore offers a comprehensive symbolic reading of the entire system.

The Four Types of Offerings

The inauguration included four types of offerings:

1. The bull — sin offering (חטאת)
2. The first ram — burnt offering (עולה)
3. The second ram — peace offering (שלמים)
4. The bread and cakes — meal offering (מנחה)

All four categories of offerings were represented in the inauguration ceremony.

The Bull: Atonement for the Golden Calf

The bull served as a sin offering for Aharon’s involvement in the making of the Golden Calf.

Although Aharon did not act with malicious intent, the sin nevertheless required atonement. Therefore, a bull was offered, as the Torah later states regarding the sin of the anointed priest:

“If the anointed priest sins… he shall bring a bull as a sin offering.”

The structure of the offering reflected the nature of the sin:

• A small portion of the fat was burned on the altar.
• The rest of the bull was burned outside the camp.

This symbolized:

• The inner heart and intention of Aharon, which remained devoted to Hashem.
• But the outward act—the sin itself—was rejected and cast away outside the camp.

The Two Rams: The Fate of Aharon’s Sons

Abarbanel explains that the two rams symbolize the two groups of Aharon’s sons.

Aharon had four sons:

• Nadav and Avihu — the elder two.
• Elazar and Itamar — the younger two.

The word “אילים” (rams) also relates to strength or power, referring to the sons who were fit for priestly service.

The First Ram: Nadav and Avihu

The first ram was completely burned on the altar.

This symbolizes:

• Nadav and Avihu,
• Who would later die when offering their unauthorized incense,
• And would be entirely consumed before Hashem.

Just as the ram was completely burned, so too their lives would end in total devotion, with nothing remaining.

The Second Ram: Elazar and Itamar

The second ram was a peace offering.

This symbolizes:

• Elazar and Itamar, the younger sons,
• Who would survive and continue the priestly line.

In the peace offering:

• Part is offered to Hashem.
• Part is eaten by the priests.
• Part belongs to the owners.

This represents:

• Harmony and peace between the priests and Hashem.
• Their continued life and service.

For this reason, the second ram is called:

אֵיל הַמִּלֻּאִים
“The ram of inauguration”

because it completes their consecration and prepares them for service.

The Blood on the Ear, Hand, and Foot

From the blood of the second ram, it was placed on:

• The right ear
• The right thumb
• The right big toe

This symbolizes:

• The ear: to listen to Hashem’s teachings.
• The hand: to perform His service.
• The foot: to walk in His commandments.

All were on the right side, the side associated with perfection and virtue.

The Meal Offering: Gratitude and Devotion

The bread, cakes, and wafers represented the meal offering.

These symbolized:

• Gratitude to Hashem
• A gift from the servant to the King
• Thanksgiving for forgiveness and acceptance

They were all unleavened to represent:

• The removal of the evil inclination
• Purity and sincerity in service

The Order of the Offerings

Abarbanel explains the sequence:

1. Sin offering (bull)
   Atonement for the sin.
2. Burnt offering (first ram)
   Complete devotion to Hashem.
3. Peace offering (second ram)
   Harmony between Hashem and the priests.
4. Meal offering
   A gift of gratitude after reconciliation.

This sequence reflects the spiritual progression:

• First, sin is removed.
• Then one dedicates himself fully to Hashem.
• Then peace and closeness are restored.
• Finally, one expresses gratitude.

The Two Anointings of Aharon

This interpretation also explains why Aharon was anointed twice:

1. The first anointing:
   
   • Made him Kohen Gadol.
   • A personal elevation.
2. The second anointing:
   
   • With his sons.
   • Established the priesthood for all generations.

Summary of the First Symbolic System

The inauguration offerings symbolize Aharon’s atonement and the destiny of his sons:

• Bull: atonement for the Golden Calf.
• First ram: Nadav and Avihu, consumed entirely.
• Second ram: Elazar and Itamar, who would live and serve.
• Meal offering: gratitude and reconciliation.
• Blood on ear, hand, and foot: dedication of hearing, action, and movement to Hashem.
• Entire sequence: from sin, to devotion, to peace, to gratitude.

This concludes Abarbanel’s first symbolic interpretation of the milu’im, rooted in the Torah’s historical and midrashic framework.

Part III — The Second Symbolic System: The Milu’im as the Model of Human Perfection

Abarbanel now presents a second symbolic interpretation of the inauguration offerings, not based on the sin of the Golden Calf, but on a philosophical model of the human being and the path to spiritual perfection.

In this system, the entire consecration process becomes a symbolic lesson about how a person should live throughout his life.

The Human Being as the Structure of the Offerings

Abarbanel explains that the human being is comparable to the structure of the inauguration offerings:

• The bull represents the physical body.
• The two rams represent the two aspects of the intellect:
  
  • The speculative (contemplative) intellect.
  • The practical intellect.

Together, these three elements—body and two forms of intellect—compose the full human being.

These are the “three offerings” that must be brought and refined in the service of Hashem.

The Bull: The Physical Body

The bull represents the material aspect of the human being—the physical body and its appetites.

In the inauguration ritual:

• Only a small portion of the bull’s blood and fat is offered on the altar.
• The rest is burned outside the camp.

This symbolizes the proper conduct of a perfected person:

• He uses only a small portion of the material world.
• Only what is necessary for survival and proper health.
• The rest of his physical drives are restrained and set aside.

The physical dimension is not completely eliminated, but it is minimized and controlled.

The First Ram: The Speculative Intellect

The first ram represents the speculative or contemplative intellect—the part of the soul that seeks knowledge and truth.

In the ritual:

• The entire ram is burned on the altar.
• It is wholly devoted to Hashem.

This symbolizes that the contemplative intellect should be:

• Completely dedicated to divine knowledge.
• Fully consecrated to the service of Hashem.
• Entirely oriented toward spiritual truth.

The intellectual life of the person is meant to be wholly sanctified.

The Second Ram: The Practical Intellect

The second ram represents the practical intellect—the faculty responsible for action and moral conduct.

In the ritual:

• Some of the ram is offered to Hashem.
• Some is given to the priests.
• Some is eaten by the owners.

This reflects the nature of practical life:

• Part of one’s actions must be directed entirely toward Hashem.
• Part is for the benefit of others.
• Part is for one’s own necessary sustenance.

This is the balanced structure of ethical life.

Blood on the Ear, Hand, and Foot

From the second ram, blood is placed on:

• The ear
• The thumb
• The big toe

This symbolizes the three primary forms of human action:

• Hearing and learning
• Doing and creating
• Walking and living

These represent the verse:

“נַעֲשֶׂה וְנִשְׁמָע”
“We will do and we will hear.”

The practical intellect governs these activities, directing them toward righteousness.

The Meal Offerings: Spiritual Refinement

The unleavened breads represent further refinement.

They symbolize:

• Purification from the evil inclination.
• Simplicity and spiritual clarity.
• The offering of one’s actions as a gift to Hashem.

Different forms of bread reflect different levels and modes of spiritual refinement.

The Mixture of Blood and Oil

The ritual included a mixture of:

• Blood from the altar
• Anointing oil

This mixture was sprinkled on the priests and their garments.

Abarbanel explains that this symbolizes:

• The blending of human life (blood)
• With divine wisdom and holiness (oil)

When a person unites his life-force with divine wisdom, he achieves true spiritual greatness and priestly stature.

The Seven Days: The Span of Human Life

The inauguration lasted seven days.

Abarbanel explains that these seven days symbolize the full span of human life:

• The number seven represents the cycle of existence.
• It reflects the totality of one’s years.

Just as the priests underwent this process over seven days, so too a person must spend his entire life engaged in this process of refinement.

The Kohen Gadol as the Model Human Being

The Kohen Gadol, who undergoes this training, represents the ideal human being.

He:

• Wears garments of holiness.
• Refines body and intellect.
• Serves Hashem with purity and wisdom.

Because the High Priest stands at the head of the nation, his symbolic training serves as a model for the entire people.

The entire ceremony is therefore:

• A lesson in how to live.
• A model of human perfection.
• A guide for every person who seeks to serve Hashem.

Summary of the Second Symbolic System

• Bull: the physical body, restrained and purified.
• First ram: speculative intellect, wholly devoted to Hashem.
• Second ram: practical intellect, guiding action.
• Blood on ear, hand, and foot: learning, action, and conduct.
• Meal offerings: spiritual refinement and gratitude.
• Blood and oil: union of life and divine wisdom.
• Seven days: the span of human life.
• Kohen Gadol: model of the perfected human being.

With this, Abarbanel concludes the second symbolic interpretation of the milu’im and completes his commentary on 29:1.

29:38–46 — זֶה אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ…

“This is what you shall offer upon the altar…”

This section is broken up into two parts:

• Part I — Purpose of the Tamid: gratitude, daily life, Matan Torah, Yetziat Mitzrayim
• Part II — Description, function, and holiness of the incense altar

Part I — The Purpose of the Daily Offerings (Philosophical Section)

After completing the commands regarding the inauguration of the priests, the Torah now turns to the daily service of the altar: the offering of two lambs each day, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. Abarbanel opens by asking a fundamental question: why, at this point, does the Torah mention only the daily burnt offerings, and not the many other sacrifices such as sin offerings or guilt offerings?

The Altar Was Not Meant Primarily for Atonement

Abarbanel explains that the altar was not originally intended as a place for atonement through sin offerings. Hashem does not desire that people sin and then seek forgiveness through sacrifices. The system of sin offerings was introduced only after the sin of the Golden Calf, as a corrective measure for human failure.

Therefore, when the Torah describes the regular service of the altar, it focuses on the daily burnt offering—the Tamid—because this reflects the altar’s true and original purpose.

The daily offerings are not primarily about atonement. Rather, they are expressions of:

• Gratitude
• Devotion
• Recognition of Hashem’s continuous kindness

The Two Daily Lambs: Memory of the Foundations of Faith

Abarbanel explains that the two daily offerings correspond to the two great foundations of Israel’s faith:

1. The morning offering corresponds to Matan Torah.
2. The afternoon offering corresponds to Yetziat Mitzrayim.

These two events are the pillars of Jewish belief:

• The revelation at Sinai established the truth of prophecy and Torah.
• The Exodus demonstrated Hashem’s providence and power over the world.

By offering the two daily lambs, Israel continually remembers these two central events.

The Symbolism of the Accompanying Offerings

Each daily lamb was offered with:

• A tenth of an eifah of fine flour
• Mixed with oil
• And accompanied by a libation of wine

Abarbanel explains the symbolism:

The tenth of an eifah of flour

• Commemorates the manna in the wilderness.
• The manna was also measured by a tenth of an eifah per person.
• It represents Hashem’s daily provision of sustenance.

The oil

• Symbolizes honor, elevation, and richness.
• Oil enhances food and brings light.
• It represents the dignity and blessing that come from Hashem.

The wine

• Symbolizes joy.
• Wine gladdens the heart of man.
• It represents the happiness and satisfaction that come from divine blessing.

Together, these elements represent a complete expression of gratitude:

• Sustenance (flour)
• Honor and blessing (oil)
• Joy (wine)

A Second Interpretation: Daily Gratitude for Life

Abarbanel offers an additional explanation.

The two daily offerings correspond to two fundamental aspects of human existence:

1. The renewal of life and the soul each day.
2. The provision of sustenance throughout the day.

Accordingly:

• The morning offering expresses gratitude for:
  
  • The return of the soul after sleep.
  • The gift of life renewed each day.
• The afternoon offering expresses gratitude for:
  
  • The day’s sustenance.
  • The livelihood provided by Hashem.

In this interpretation, the Tamid becomes a daily act of thanksgiving:

• In the morning: for life itself.
• In the evening: for the blessings of the day.

The Altar as a Place of Gratitude, Not Sin

From this perspective, the daily offerings define the essential nature of the altar.

Its primary function is not:

• To repair sin,
• Or to serve as a place of punishment and atonement.

Rather, it is a place where:

• The nation expresses thanks,
• Recognizes Hashem’s kindness,
• And renews its connection to the foundations of faith.

The Tamid, offered every day without interruption, represents the constant relationship between Israel and Hashem.

Summary of Part I

• The Torah mentions the daily offerings here because they represent the altar’s true purpose.
• The altar was not primarily for atonement.
• The Tamid expresses gratitude and devotion.
• Morning lamb: remembrance of Matan Torah.
• Afternoon lamb: remembrance of Yetziat Mitzrayim.
• Flour: symbol of manna and sustenance.
• Oil: symbol of honor and blessing.
• Wine: symbol of joy.
• Second interpretation:
  
  • Morning offering: gratitude for life.
  • Evening offering: gratitude for sustenance.

Part II — The Incense Altar (Technical–Peshat Section)

After explaining the meaning of the daily offerings, the Torah now introduces the command to make the incense altar. Abarbanel explains that this section follows naturally from the discussion of the Tamid offerings.

Once the Torah described the daily burnt offerings on the outer altar, it was necessary to address another central element of the daily service: the incense. Since the incense was not offered on the outer altar, the Torah now introduces a separate altar dedicated specifically to this service.

Structure of the Incense Altar

The incense altar was constructed from acacia wood and had the following measurements:

• Length: one cubit
• Width: one cubit
• Height: two cubits

It was square in shape and overlaid with gold. It also had:

• A golden crown around its top
• Four golden rings
• Poles for carrying

All of these features paralleled the construction of other sacred vessels of the Mishkan, demonstrating its importance and sanctity.

Placement of the Altar

The incense altar was placed:

• Inside the Sanctuary (Heichal),
• Outside the curtain,
• Opposite the Ark and the Kaporet.

Although it stood outside the curtain, it was positioned directly before the place of the Divine Presence. This placement indicated its elevated sanctity and its connection to the innermost part of the Mishkan.

The Daily Incense Service

Aharon was commanded to burn incense on this altar twice each day:

1. In the morning:
   
   • At the time when the lamps were cleaned and prepared.
2. In the afternoon:
   
   • At the time when the lamps were lit.

Thus, the incense service was synchronized with the daily care of the menorah, forming part of the regular rhythm of the Sanctuary service.

Restrictions on the Incense Altar

The Torah strictly limits the function of this altar.

It was forbidden to offer upon it:

• Any foreign incense
• Burnt offerings
• Meal offerings
• Libations

Its sole function was the burning of the sacred incense.

This separation emphasized the unique holiness of the incense service and distinguished this altar from the outer altar used for animal and grain offerings.

The Yom Kippur Service

Once each year, on Yom Kippur, the altar received a special service.

On that day:

• Blood from the sin offering was placed on its corners.
• This was done as part of the atonement process.

This annual act demonstrated the exceptional holiness of the incense altar. It was considered:

קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים לַה׳
“Most holy to Hashem.”

Summary of Part II

• The incense altar is introduced after the Tamid offerings.
• Built of acacia wood, overlaid with gold.
• Square: one cubit by one cubit, two cubits high.
• With crown, rings, and poles.
• Placed inside the Heichal, before the curtain.
• Incense burned twice daily:
  
  • Morning during lamp cleaning.
  • Evening during lamp lighting.
• No other offerings permitted on it.
• Once yearly, blood applied on Yom Kippur.
• Declared “most holy to Hashem.”

Chapter 29 Summary

In Chapter 29, Abarbanel explains the seven-day inauguration of Aharon and his sons and the daily offerings of the altar. He first presents the peshat of the milu’im as a process of transition and training, through which the priests were sanctified and prepared for their sacred role. He then offers a symbolic interpretation based on the sin of the Golden Calf, in which the bull and the two rams represent Aharon’s atonement and the destinies of his sons. Finally, he presents a philosophical model in which the inauguration offerings represent the structure of the human being: the body and the two forms of intellect, all of which must be refined in the service of Hashem. The daily offerings that conclude the chapter, he explains, express not primarily atonement but gratitude—recalling both the giving of the Torah and the Exodus, and symbolizing the daily gifts of life and sustenance.

Summary of Abarbanel on Parshas Tetzaveh

Across the parsha, Abarbanel presents the priesthood as a carefully ordered system designed to express both national and personal spiritual perfection. The priestly garments symbolize the proper ordering of the human faculties, the inauguration offerings represent the refinement of body and intellect, and the daily sacrifices express gratitude for the foundations of faith and the blessings of daily life. Throughout his commentary, Abarbanel consistently moves from the practical to the symbolic, and from ritual detail to philosophical meaning, showing that the Mishkan service was not merely ceremonial but a complete spiritual model for the nation and the individual alike.

📖 Source

• Abarbanel on Tetzaveh: 27:20-29:8

Rav Avigdor Miller on Parshas Tetzaveh — Commentary

Introduction to Rav Avigdor Miller on Parshas Tetzaveh

Parshas Tetzaveh appears at first glance to be a technical parsha: garments of the Kohanim, the consecration ceremony, the ketores, and the daily avodah of the Mishkan. Yet in the teachings of Rav Avigdor Miller, these details are not merely instructions for a distant Sanctuary. They are a living blueprint for the avodah of every Jew. The kohen is not only a priest in the Beis Hamikdash; he is the model of the ideal servant of Hashem, and the parsha is teaching how a human being is shaped into such a servant.

One of the first lessons is the power of exteriority. The Torah teaches that a kohen who performs the avodah without his garments is no longer considered a kohen at all. Even if he is a descendant of Aharon, the avodah becomes invalid. From here we learn that clothing is not superficial. External actions and appearances mold the inner personality. The garments are not merely decoration; they create the identity of the kohen and awaken the inner dignity and responsibility of his role.

From there the parsha moves to the consecration ceremony, where the blood is placed first on the ear of the kohen. This surprising detail becomes, in Rav Miller’s teaching, a fundamental principle of avodas Hashem. Before the hands act and before the feet walk, the ear must be dedicated. Obedience and listening to the word of Hashem come before all other service. The Navi already declared:
שְׁמֹעַ מִזֶּבַח טוֹב — “Listening is better than sacrifice” (שמואל א ט״ו:כ״ב).
The ear is the gateway to all spiritual growth, and therefore it is sanctified first.

Another central feature of the parsha is the ketores, the incense that filled the Mishkan with fragrance. Rav Miller explains that the Torah is teaching us that the senses themselves must be enlisted in the service of Hashem. The sweet aroma of the ketores created admiration and reverence for the place of the Shechinah. A person’s mind is influenced by what he smells, sees, and experiences. Therefore, holiness must be surrounded by dignity, beauty, and sweetness, so that the heart will naturally be drawn to it.

At the same time, the parsha stands close to the story of Purim, and Rav Miller uses that connection to teach a foundational principle: the salvation of the Jewish people comes only through calling out to Hashem. The verse declares:
כִּי מִי גוֹי גָּדוֹל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ אֱלֹקִים קְרֹבִים אֵלָיו בְּכׇל קָרְאֵנוּ אֵלָיו
“For what great nation is there that has G-d close to it, whenever we call out to Him” (דברים ד:ז).
Purim was not inevitable. It was the result of three days of fasting, crying, and prayer. The message is that the Jewish nation’s true strength lies not in political or military means, but in tefillah.

Finally, the parsha teaches a lesson about endings. The bells of the Kohen Gadol are heard not only when he enters the Sanctuary, but also when he leaves. From this, Rav Miller derives a principle: the end of a mitzvah is as important as its beginning. True avodas Hashem means maintaining reverence and enthusiasm from the first moment until the last. Whether it is the end of davening or the departure of Shabbos, the conclusion reveals the authenticity of the service.

Taken together, these teachings form a single, unified program of avodas Hashem. Parshas Tetzaveh becomes a guide to shaping the entire human being:

• The garments teach that actions shape identity.
• The ear teaches that obedience is the foundation of service.
• The ketores teaches that the senses must be trained to love holiness.
• The Purim connection teaches that prayer is the source of salvation.
• The bells of the robe teach that the end of a mitzvah must match its beginning.

In this way, Rav Avigdor Miller reads Parshas Tetzaveh not as a description of ancient priestly rituals, but as a complete model of how a Jew lives: with dignity in his appearance, attentiveness in his listening, sweetness in his surroundings, sincerity in his prayer, and consistency from beginning to end.

Part I — The Power of Exteriority

(From: Tetzaveh 5779 – Robes of Splendor)

Parshas Tetzaveh opens with the description of the bigdei kehunah, the sacred garments worn by the Kohanim. At first glance, these garments appear to be ceremonial clothing, garments of dignity and beauty that give honor to the avodah. But Rav Avigdor Miller explains that the Torah is teaching something far more fundamental: clothing is not merely external decoration. It is an essential part of spiritual identity.

The Torah states regarding the consecration of the Kohanim:
וְחָגַרְתָּ אֹתָם אַבְנֵט… וְהָיְתָה לָהֶם כְּהֻנָּה
“You shall gird them with belts… and it shall be for them the priesthood” (שמות כ״ט:ט).

Chazal explain this phrase:
בזמן שבגדיהם עליהם כהונתם עליהם
“Only when their garments are upon them is their priesthood upon them” (זבחים י״ז ב).

This means that a kohen who performs the avodah without his proper garments is not merely lacking a detail; he is no longer considered a kohen for that moment. Even though he is a descendant of Aharon, even though he is trained and qualified, and even though he performs the avodah properly in every other respect, if he is missing even one garment, the entire service is invalid. He is treated as a zar, a stranger.

This is a startling idea. The kohen’s identity is not defined solely by lineage or knowledge. It is defined by what he wears. The garments themselves create the reality of his kehunah.

The Garments That Make the Kohen

The Torah commands that the kohen wear four garments:

• Kesones — tunic
• Michnasayim — trousers
• Migba’as — head covering
• Avnet — belt

If even one of these is missing, the avodah becomes invalid. The garments are not symbolic extras; they are essential to the service.

Chazal derive this from the phrase בני אהרן הכהנים, “the sons of Aharon, the kohanim” (ויקרא א:ה). The extra word “kohanim” teaches that they must be in their state of kehunah — meaning, wearing their garments. Without the garments, they are not functioning as kohanim at all.

This leads to a profound question:
Why should clothing make such a difference?

If the kohen would spend hours studying mussar before performing the avodah, we could understand that. Spiritual preparation elevates the mind. But here the Torah teaches that even if he puts on the garments without thinking, the avodah becomes valid. It is the external act alone that determines his status.

The Secret of the Uniform

Rav Miller explains this through a simple observation about human nature. When a man puts on a uniform, he becomes a different person. A man who yesterday may have behaved irresponsibly puts on a policeman’s uniform, and suddenly he feels responsibility. The uniform awakens in him a sense of duty. He stands on the side of law and order.

Why does this happen? Because human beings are deeply affected by their external appearance. Clothing is not merely fabric; it carries emotional and psychological power. It calls forth the inner dignity that lies dormant within the person.

Chazal express this principle in a famous teaching:
החיצוניות מעוררת את הפנימיות
“The external awakens the internal” (מסילת ישרים, פרק ז).

When a person dresses like a mentch, he begins to feel like a mentch. When he dresses like a servant of Hashem, he begins to live like one.

Clothes Make the Man

This principle applies not only to kohanim. It applies to every Jew. External behavior shapes internal character. When a person puts on the clothing of a rav, or even sits in a position of honor, he begins to feel responsibility toward others. His clothing and position draw out the deeper qualities within his soul.

The Torah is teaching that human beings are not purely intellectual creatures. We are shaped by our surroundings, by our habits, and by our external actions. The outer form molds the inner life.

This is why the bigdei kehunah are indispensable. The kohen must not only think holy thoughts; he must look the part. The garments awaken within him the awareness that he stands before Hashem.

The Lesson for Every Jew

From this, Rav Miller derives a universal lesson. The kohen is a model for all of Israel. Every Jew is meant to live with a sense of dignity and sacred identity. The way we dress, the way we carry ourselves, and the external forms of our lives are not trivial. They are tools for shaping the soul.

When a person surrounds himself with signs of holiness:

• Modest and dignified clothing
• Sacred environments
• Visible reminders of mitzvos

these external factors awaken the inner self. The garments of the kohen teach that avodas Hashem begins not only in the mind or the heart, but in the visible actions and forms of life.

The Foundational Principle

The first lesson of Parshas Tetzaveh, according to Rav Miller, is therefore:

• External behavior creates internal transformation.
• Holiness is built not only through thoughts, but through actions, appearances, and habits.
• A person becomes what he dresses for, what he practices, and what he surrounds himself with.

The kohen’s garments are not merely ceremonial attire. They are the Torah’s declaration that the path to inner greatness begins with the outer form.

Part II — The Avodah of the Ear

(From: Tetzaveh 5780 – Service by Ear; Tetzaveh 5782 – Career of Listening)

One of the most striking moments in Parshas Tetzaveh occurs during the inauguration of the Kohanim. Before they begin their sacred service, the Torah commands that the blood of the ram of consecration be placed upon three parts of their bodies:

וְשָׁחַטְתָּ אֶת הָאַיִל… וְלָקַחְתָּ מִדָּמוֹ וְנָתַתָּה עַל תְּנוּךְ אֹזֶן אַהֲרֹן וְעַל תְּנוּךְ אֹזֶן בָּנָיו הַיְמָנִית
“You shall slaughter the ram… and take of its blood and place it upon the cartilage of Aharon’s right ear and upon the right ears of his sons” (שמות כ״ט:כ׳).

Only afterward was the blood placed upon their hands and their feet. The order is deliberate. The Torah is teaching that before the kohen’s actions, before his walking and his work, the ear must be consecrated.

Why the Ear Comes First

This detail demands explanation. Why should the ear precede the hands and feet? Why is listening the first step in avodas Hashem?

Rav Miller explains that the answer lies in a powerful teaching from the Navi Shmuel. When Shaul HaMelech spared the cattle of Amalek in order to bring them as offerings, the Navi rebuked him:

הִנֵּה שְׁמֹעַ מִזֶּבַח טוֹב
“Behold, listening is better than sacrifice” (שמואל א ט״ו:כ״ב).

Korbanos are holy and precious. They are among the most sacred services of the Torah. And yet, obedience to Hashem’s word is greater than even the greatest sacrifice. The ear, the faculty of listening and submitting to the Divine command, is the root of all avodah.

That is why, at the very moment when the kohanim are being prepared for their sacred service, the Torah teaches them this lesson:
Before the hands act, the ears must listen.

The Greatness of the Ear

Rav Miller goes further. He explains that the ear itself is one of the greatest gifts that Hashem gave to man. People live their lives without ever pausing to appreciate the gift of hearing. Yet hearing is a central part of life’s joy and meaning.

Chazal teach that if a person damages another’s hearing, the compensation is not merely for the ear. It is as if he has taken away the person’s entire existence. The Gemara states:

חירשו נותן לו דמי כולו
“If one makes a man deaf, he must pay the value of the entire person” (בבא קמא פ״ה ב).

This shows the tremendous value of the ear. Without hearing, a person is cut off from much of life’s experience.

And yet, people are more excited by artificial earphones than by the natural ears that Hashem gave them. They rejoice when they buy devices that allow them to hear music, but they never stop to thank Hashem for the miraculous instruments already attached to their heads.

The Torah, by consecrating the ear first, is teaching us to recognize the greatness of this gift and to use it properly.

Listening as the Foundation of Service

The kohen’s service is not defined first by action, but by obedience. He must become a listener before he becomes a servant.

This principle applies to all of Israel. The foundation of Jewish life is the declaration:

שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל
“Hear, O Israel.”

Judaism begins with listening. Before we act, we must hear the word of Hashem. Before we serve, we must submit.

The kohen therefore begins his career not with his hands, not with the korbanos, but with his ear. The blood on the ear symbolizes that the first and greatest service of Hashem is obedience.

The Error of Substituting Action for Obedience

Rav Miller emphasizes that even holy actions cannot substitute for obedience. Shaul HaMelech thought he was doing something noble by sparing the animals to offer them as korbanos. But the Navi rebuked him. Sacrifice without obedience is not avodas Hashem.

A person may perform impressive religious acts, but if he is not listening to what Hashem actually commands, then the foundation is missing. The avodah of the ear must come first.

A Career of Listening

The consecration of the ear was not a one-time ritual. It was the foundation of the kohen’s entire life. His career was meant to be a career of listening — constant attentiveness to the will of Hashem.

From this we learn:

• The ear is the gateway to the soul.
• Listening and obedience are the foundation of all avodas Hashem.
• Even the most sacred actions cannot replace submission to the Divine command.
• The gifts Hashem gives us, like the ability to hear, must be appreciated and used for His service.

The Central Lesson

The second lesson of Parshas Tetzaveh is therefore:

• A servant of Hashem begins with listening.
• Before the hands act, the ears must obey.
• The foundation of all holiness is submission to the word of Hashem.

Only after the ear is consecrated can the hands and feet be dedicated to the service of the Sanctuary.

Part III — The Avodah of Aroma

(From: Tetzaveh 5781 – A Sweet Savor; Tetzaveh 5785 – The Avodah of Aroma)

Among the sacred vessels of the Mishkan described in Parshas Tetzaveh is one that seems, at first glance, less central than the others: the golden altar of incense.

וְעָשִׂיתָ מִזְבֵּחַ מִקְטַר קְטֹרֶת
“You shall make an altar for the burning of incense” (שמות ל:א).

Every morning, Aharon would burn the ketores upon this altar:

וְהִקְטִיר עָלָיו אַהֲרֹן קְטֹרֶת סַמִּים בַּבֹּקֶר בַּבֹּקֶר
“Aharon shall burn upon it incense of spices every morning” (שם ל:ז).

This daily act filled the Mishkan with a powerful and delightful fragrance. But what was the purpose of this sweet aroma? What spiritual function could smell possibly serve in the service of Hashem?

The Rambam’s Explanation

Rav Avigdor Miller begins by quoting the Rambam, who explains the mitzvah of ketores in the Moreh Nevuchim (ג:מ״ה). The Rambam writes that the human mind is elevated by pleasant fragrances. When a person enters a place filled with a sweet aroma, he instinctively feels admiration and appreciation for that place.

Therefore, Hashem commanded that the Mishkan be filled with the fragrance of ketores. As the scent reached the person’s senses, it conveyed a silent message to his mind:

“This is the sweetest place in the world. This is the place of the Shechinah. This is where life’s true delight is found.”

The Torah did not rely only on intellect. It enlisted the senses themselves to educate the heart.

The Fragrance That Filled the Land

The fragrance of the ketores was not limited to the Mishkan alone. Chazal describe how its aroma spread far beyond the Temple precincts.

כַּלָּה שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה לְהִתְקַשֵּׁט מֵרֵיחַ קְטֹרֶת
“A bride in Yerushalayim did not need perfume because of the fragrance of the ketores.”

נָשִׁים שֶׁבִּירִיחוֹ אֵינָן צְרִיכוֹת לְהִתְבַּשֵּׂם מֵרֵיחַ קְטֹרֶת
“The women in Yericho did not need perfume because of the fragrance of the ketores” (יומא ל״ט ב).

The scent of the ketores became a national experience. It was not merely a ritual; it was an atmosphere. The entire land was filled with the sweetness of avodas Hashem.

The Purpose of Fragrance

From this, Rav Miller derives a fundamental principle. Human beings are deeply affected by their senses. Smell, in particular, has the power to shape emotional perception.

When a place smells pleasant, we instinctively feel drawn to it. When something carries a sweet aroma, it appears more valuable and attractive. The Torah uses this natural human tendency as a tool for spiritual growth.

The ketores taught that:

• Holiness should be associated with sweetness.
• The service of Hashem should be the most delightful experience.
• The senses themselves must be trained to appreciate what is truly important.

The Lesson of Ezra and the Perfume Sellers

Rav Miller illustrates this idea through an unusual enactment of Ezra HaSofer. The Gemara states that Ezra permitted traveling perfume sellers to enter any town, even if local merchants objected. Normally, outside competition was restricted, but not in the case of perfumes.

Why were perfumes so important?

Because a man must always appreciate what is truly valuable in his home — his wife. Over time, familiarity dulls appreciation. Therefore, perfume helps renew admiration and affection. The pleasant fragrance reminds a person of the value of what stands before him.

Ezra understood the lesson of the ketores: the mind is influenced by scent. By ensuring that perfume was readily available, he was protecting the dignity and harmony of Jewish homes.

The World’s Distorted Sense of Sweetness

Rav Miller contrasts the Torah’s approach with the ways of the nations. The world glorifies trivial and even destructive pleasures, surrounding them with beauty, excitement, and attraction.

Violence, immorality, and empty entertainment are presented as glamorous. At the same time, the things that truly matter — Torah, mitzvos, modesty, and holiness — are often belittled and made to appear dull or unattractive.

This is the work of the yetzer hara: to make the important things seem unappealing, and the unimportant things seem sweet.

The ketores teaches the opposite lesson:

• We must make holiness attractive.
• We must surround Torah and mitzvos with dignity and beauty.
• We must train our senses to love what is truly good.

Elevating the Important Things

From the ketores, we learn that holiness does not always announce itself. It must be presented in a way that captures the human heart.

Just as the Mishkan was filled with fragrance, so too:

• A shul should be the most honorable building in the town (שבת י״א א).
• A home should be filled with dignity and respect.
• Torah and mitzvos should be associated with joy and beauty.

The senses are not enemies of spirituality. They are tools for it. When used properly, they elevate the mind and heart toward Hashem.

The Central Lesson

The third lesson of Parshas Tetzaveh is therefore:

• The senses are part of avodas Hashem.
• Holiness must be surrounded with sweetness, beauty, and dignity.
• What we glorify becomes important in our eyes.
• We must consciously make Torah and mitzvos the sweetest experiences of life.

The ketores was not merely a fragrance. It was a silent teacher, filling the air with the message that the service of Hashem is the greatest delight in the world.

Part IV — Prayer as the Source of Salvation

(From: Purim – Tetzaveh 5783 – Rescued By Prayer)

Parshas Tetzaveh often falls in close proximity to the days of Purim, and Rav Avigdor Miller draws a powerful lesson from that connection. The parsha that teaches the consecration of the Kohanim and the service of the Mishkan also teaches the inner avodah that sustains the Jewish people in every generation: tefillah.

Rav Miller begins with a startling thought. The story of Purim did not have to end with joy and celebration. We read the Megillah today knowing the happy ending, and therefore it seems inevitable. But in truth, it could have ended in catastrophe. It could have become a national tragedy instead of a national salvation.

Haman possessed tremendous power. He held the king’s ring, which meant that he had authority to act as he pleased. Unlike later tyrants who concealed their crimes, Haman intended to destroy the Jewish people openly and publicly throughout the empire. From a natural perspective, the situation was hopeless.

And yet, the outcome in Persia was the opposite of destruction. Instead of a day of mourning, the Jewish people celebrated Purim. This contrast leads to a crucial question: what changed the outcome?

The Principle of Divine Closeness

The Gemara records that Rav Masnah would introduce his Purim discourse with a verse from the Torah:

כִּי מִי גוֹי גָּדוֹל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ אֱלֹקִים קְרֹבִים אֵלָיו
“For what great nation is there that has G-d close to it” (דברים ד:ז).

But the verse continues:

בְּכׇל קָרְאֵנוּ אֵלָיו
“whenever we call out to Him.”

These final words are the key. Hashem is close to the Jewish people not unconditionally, but when they call out to Him. Salvation is not automatic. It comes in response to tefillah.

The closeness of Hashem is therefore a relationship, not a guarantee. It is activated when the Jewish people cry out to Him.

Mordechai and Esther’s Response

When the decree of destruction was issued, Mordechai and Esther did not turn first to politics or strategy. They did not organize campaigns or blame their enemies. They understood the true cause and the true solution.

וּמׇרְדֳּכַי יָדַע אֶת כׇּל אֲשֶׁר נַעֲשָׂה
“Mordechai knew all that had been done” (אסתר ד:א).

Chazal explain that he understood not only the events, but the reason behind them. The crisis was a message from Heaven. And therefore, the response had to be directed toward Heaven.

Esther sent word to Mordechai:

וְצוּמוּ עָלַי… וְאַל תֹּאכְלוּ וְאַל תִּשְׁתּוּ שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים
“Fast for me… do not eat or drink for three days” (אסתר ד:ט״ז).

This was an unprecedented act. For three days and three nights, the Jewish people fasted, cried, and prayed. It was not a symbolic gesture. It was a total immersion in tefillah, an outpouring of the nation’s heart to Hashem.

They were not seeking publicity or political advantage. Their prayers were directed only to one address:
בְּכׇל קָרְאֵנוּ אֵלָיו — calling out to Hashem alone.

And because of that, Purim took place. Without that tefillah, the outcome could have been entirely different.

The Real Source of Salvation

From this, Rav Miller draws a fundamental lesson. Jewish history is not determined primarily by political forces or military strength. The true determinant is whether the Jewish people call out to Hashem.

Hashem’s promise of closeness is real, but it depends on one condition:
בְּכׇל קָרְאֵנוּ אֵלָיו — whenever we call out to Him.

When the Jewish people cry out sincerely, salvation comes. When they neglect tefillah, the closeness of Hashem is not activated.

Prayer Without Publicity

Rav Miller emphasizes another point. The tefillah of Purim was not a public spectacle designed for the newspapers. It was not a “day of prayer” meant for publicity or political messaging. It was genuine crying out to Hashem, without any other agenda.

True tefillah is directed only to Hashem. It is not meant to impress people or influence public opinion. Its entire focus is the relationship between the Jew and his Creator.

The Lesson of Purim in Tetzaveh

Why does this lesson belong in Parshas Tetzaveh?

Because the parsha describes the avodah of the Kohanim — the daily service in the Mishkan. Rav Miller teaches that the ultimate avodah of the Jewish people, in every generation, is tefillah. Just as the kohen stands in the Sanctuary serving Hashem, so too the Jewish nation stands before Him in prayer.

The consecration of the kohen, the incense of the Mishkan, and the bells of the robe all point toward one truth: the Jewish people live through their relationship with Hashem. And that relationship is expressed most powerfully through tefillah.

The Central Lesson

The fourth lesson of Parshas Tetzaveh is therefore:

• Jewish survival depends on calling out to Hashem.
• Salvation is not automatic; it comes in response to tefillah.
• True prayer is directed only to Hashem, without ulterior motives.
• The greatest strength of the Jewish people is their closeness to Hashem.

As the Torah declares:

כִּי מִי גוֹי גָּדוֹל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ אֱלֹקִים קְרֹבִים אֵלָיו
בְּכׇל קָרְאֵנוּ אֵלָיו
“For what great nation is there that has G-d close to it, whenever we call out to Him” (דברים ד:ז).

Part V — The End Is Important

(From: Tetzaveh 5784 – The End Is Important)

Among the garments of the Kohen Gadol described in Parshas Tetzaveh is the מְעִיל הָאֵפוֹד, the blue robe worn over the ephod. Along the hem of this robe were small golden bells that produced a sound whenever the Kohen Gadol moved.

The Torah says about these bells:

וְנִשְׁמַע קוֹלוֹ בְּבֹאוֹ אֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ לִפְנֵי ה׳ וּבְצֵאתוֹ
“Its sound shall be heard when he comes into the holy place before Hashem and when he goes out” (שמות כ״ח:ל״ה).

At first glance, the phrase “when he goes out” seems unnecessary. If the bells make noise when he walks, then obviously they will be heard both when he enters and when he leaves. Why does the Torah emphasize the sound of the bells upon his departure?

The Principle: The End Matters

Rav Miller explains this based on a teaching attributed to the Vilna Gaon, found in the sefer Ma’alos HaTorah. The six hundred and thirteen mitzvos are not only individual commandments; they are also general principles meant to guide every aspect of life. Each mitzvah serves as a model for broader spiritual behavior.

From this perspective, the bells of the robe teach a universal lesson. The Torah is not speaking only about the Kohen Gadol. It is speaking to every Jew who seeks to serve Hashem.

The bells must ring not only when he enters the Sanctuary, but also when he leaves. The enthusiasm, reverence, and awareness of standing before Hashem must remain strong from beginning to end.

Human nature, however, tends toward the opposite. A person may begin a mitzvah with energy and seriousness, but as it draws to a close, his enthusiasm fades. The Torah therefore teaches:
True avodas Hashem continues with the same intensity until the very end.

The End of Shemoneh Esrei

Rav Miller illustrates this principle with a practical example from daily life. At the conclusion of Shemoneh Esrei, a person is required to step back slowly and respectfully. But many people rush through this moment, treating it casually.

Chazal say about such behavior:

רָאוּי לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא הִתְפַּלֵּל
“It would have been better for him not to have prayed at all” (יומא נ״ג ב).

This is a startling statement. Perhaps the person prayed with concentration and sincerity. But if he treats the ending lightly, it reveals that the entire avodah lacked proper reverence.

The end is not a minor detail. It is part of the mitzvah itself.

Leaving the Presence of the King

When a person stands before a king, his behavior upon departure is as important as his behavior upon arrival. If he shows excitement when the king enters but indifference when the king leaves, it reveals a lack of respect.

So too in avodas Hashem. The way a person concludes a mitzvah shows whether he truly values it.

That is why the Gemara teaches that after stepping back from Shemoneh Esrei, one should remain standing for a short time before returning to his place. The ending must reflect the same seriousness as the beginning.

The End of Shabbos

Rav Miller applies this principle to the conclusion of Shabbos. Many people prepare for Shabbos with excitement. They cook, they clean, they sing, they dress in special clothing, and they welcome the day with joy.

But as Shabbos draws to a close, some people sit impatiently, watching the clock or the sky, waiting for the moment when it ends. They are eager to return to weekday activities.

This, Rav Miller explains, is not the proper way to leave the presence of the King. Just as we hurry to welcome Shabbos, we must also be reluctant to let it go. The Jewish people are described as:

מְמַהֲרִים לָבוֹא וּמְאַחֲרִים לָצֵאת
They hurry to bring Shabbos in, and they delay its departure.

That is why Havdalah is so important. It is not merely a ritual marking the end of Shabbos. It is part of the mitzvah of remembering the sanctity of the day.

זָכוֹר אֶת יוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת לְקַדְּשׁוֹ
“Remember the day of Shabbos to sanctify it” (שמות כ׳:ח׳).

This remembrance applies not only at the beginning of Shabbos, but also at its conclusion.

From Beginning to End

The bells of the Kohen Gadol therefore teach a principle that applies to every mitzvah:

• The beginning must be reverent.
• The middle must be devoted.
• The end must be dignified.

Avodas Hashem is not measured only by how we start. It is measured by how we finish.

A mitzvah that begins with enthusiasm but ends with indifference is incomplete. The end reveals the truth of the beginning.

The Central Lesson

The fifth lesson of Parshas Tetzaveh is therefore:

• The conclusion of a mitzvah is as important as its beginning.
• Reverence must remain from start to finish.
• The way we leave a holy act reveals how much we truly value it.
• True avodas Hashem is consistent from beginning to end.

The bells of the Kohen Gadol ring both when he enters and when he leaves, reminding us that the service of Hashem must be complete — not only at the moment of inspiration, but also at the moment of departure.

Closing Synthesis — A Complete Model of Avodas Hashem

When the seven teachings of Rav Avigdor Miller on Parshas Tetzaveh are viewed together, they form not a collection of separate ideas, but a single, unified program for building a servant of Hashem. The parsha, which at first appears to be a technical description of garments, rituals, and incense, emerges as a blueprint for shaping the entire human personality.

Each element of the parsha corresponds to a different faculty of the human being:

• The garments speak to the body and outward conduct.
• The ear speaks to obedience and submission.
• The ketores speaks to the senses and emotional perception.
• The Purim connection speaks to prayer and dependence on Hashem.
• The bells of the robe speak to consistency from beginning to end.

Together, these elements create a complete system of avodas Hashem.

The Path from the Outside to the Inside

The parsha begins with the bigdei kehunah, the sacred garments of the kohen. The Torah teaches that a kohen without his garments is not considered a kohen at all. His avodah becomes invalid, even if he performs every detail correctly. From this we learn that external actions shape inner identity. Clothing is not superficial; it awakens the deeper self.

This is the first step in avodas Hashem: shaping the outer life so that it reflects the dignity of a servant of Hashem. The exterior awakens the interior.

The Foundation: Listening Before Acting

Next, the Torah consecrates the ear of the kohen before his hands and feet. The blood of the ram is placed first on the ear, teaching that obedience precedes action. As the Navi declared:

שְׁמֹעַ מִזֶּבַח טוֹב
“Listening is better than sacrifice” (שמואל א ט״ו:כ״ב).

Avodas Hashem does not begin with impressive deeds. It begins with submission to the word of Hashem. The ear is the gateway to holiness.

Training the Senses to Love Holiness

The ketores teaches that the senses themselves must be enlisted in the service of Hashem. The sweet fragrance in the Mishkan created admiration and love for the place of the Shechinah. The Torah used scent to shape the heart.

This teaches that holiness must be surrounded by dignity, beauty, and sweetness. What we make attractive becomes important in our eyes. The senses are not obstacles to spirituality; they are instruments of it.

The Power of Prayer

The proximity of Tetzaveh to Purim reveals another dimension of avodah. The Jewish people were saved in the days of Mordechai and Esther not by politics or power, but by tefillah. The Torah promises:

כִּי מִי גּוֹי גָּדוֹל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ אֱלֹקִים קְרֹבִים אֵלָיו
בְּכׇל קָרְאֵנוּ אֵלָיו
“For what great nation is there that has G-d close to it, whenever we call out to Him” (דברים ד:ז).

The closeness of Hashem is activated through prayer. The ultimate avodah of the Jewish people is to call out to Him.

Serving Hashem from Beginning to End

Finally, the bells of the Kohen Gadol’s robe teach that avodas Hashem must remain strong until the very end. The sound of the bells is heard not only when he enters the Sanctuary, but also when he leaves. The conclusion of a mitzvah reveals its true quality.

True service means maintaining reverence from beginning to end, whether in prayer, in Shabbos, or in any mitzvah.

The Five-Stage Model of Avodas Hashem

When these lessons are combined, Parshas Tetzaveh becomes a five-stage program for spiritual growth:

1. External conduct shapes identity
   The garments teach that outward behavior molds the inner self.
2. Listening is the foundation of service
   The consecrated ear teaches that obedience comes before action.
3. The senses must be trained to love holiness
   The ketores teaches that we must surround Torah and mitzvos with sweetness and dignity.
4. Prayer is the source of salvation
   The Purim story teaches that calling out to Hashem is the nation’s greatest strength.
5. The end must match the beginning
   The bells of the robe teach that true avodah continues with reverence until the very last moment.

The Message of Tetzaveh

In this light, Parshas Tetzaveh is no longer merely a description of priestly garments and Temple rituals. It is a guide to shaping the entire human being into a servant of Hashem.

It teaches:

• How to dress.
• How to listen.
• How to sense.
• How to pray.
• How to begin.
• And how to end.

The kohen becomes the model for every Jew. The Mishkan becomes the model for every life. And the avodah of Tetzaveh becomes a complete program for living in constant awareness of Hashem — from the outer garment to the innermost prayer, from the first step of a mitzvah to its final moment.

📖 Sources

• Toras Avigdor — Tetzaveh — 7 Booklets 5779-5785